text:
Liffey, Tasmania

Liffey is a rural locality and town in the local government areas of Meander Valley and Northern Midlands in the Launceston and Central regions of Tasmania. The locality is about 24 km south of the town of Westbury. The 2016 census has a population of 155 for the state suburb of Liffey. It was named by Captain William Moriarty, from Ireland. The town is situated in rainforest, on the Liffey River at the foot of the Great Western Tiers. Nearby towns are Bracknell and Blackwood Creek.

The most notable attraction in the area is Liffey Falls.

History
Liffey was gazetted as a locality in 1968. Liffey Post Office opened on 16 August 1887 and closed in 1973.

Geography
The Liffey River flows through from south-west to north-east.

Road infrastructure
Highland Lakes Road (A5) follows much of the western boundary, and passes through the south-west corner. Route C513 (Liffey Road / Gulf Road) enters from the north-east and runs west along the Liffey River to the Lower Liffey Falls carpark.

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

title: Liffey, Tasmania


text:
Attitude (Suede song)

"Attitude" is a song by Suede, released on 6 October 2003 through Columbia Records. It would be the group's final single before disbanding in late 2003. "Attitude" peaked at number 14 on the UK Singles Chart as a double A-side with "Golden Gun", becoming the group's highest-charting single since "She's in Fashion" in 1999. It also reached the top 20 in Denmark and Spain and peaked at number 50 in Ireland. Some critics viewed the single as an improvement from the group's 2002 album A New Morning. It was announced that a new album was to follow, but this was cancelled when the band announced their break-up only weeks after the single’s release.

Critical reception
The song was better received than the previous year’s singles from A New Morning. John Murphy of musicOMH wrote that "'Attitude' is one of their best tunes for years. A colder, more electronic sound has worked wonders and Brett Anderson's voice is as unmistakeable as ever as he warbles lyrics about a 'dangerous doctor in a leopard print skirt'. The truly nagging chorus haunts you for hours afterwards too." Simon Donohue of the Manchester Evening News contrasted the song with the band's popular "sing-a-long" singles "Beautiful Ones" and "Animal Nitrate", writing: "This on the other hand is vaguely experimental and almost retro in its approach. But as ever, Anderson's dulcet tones are unmistakable." Chris Heath of Dotmusic rated the song seven out of ten, saying: "the staccato bass-heavy rumblings - which might have found a slot on Coming Up - are far preferable to some of the band's weaker moments. Worth enjoying if only for the fact that you don't have to suffer the usual sub-standard album dressed around it." On the other hand, Phil Udell of Hot Press was less enthused, writing: "Those that had Suede down as a mere flash in the pan have been proven wrong, but 'Attitude' does nothing to add to the canon."

Music videos
Two versions of a video were made for "Attitude", directed by Lindy Heymann. The first edit contains no footage of Suede, but instead features actor John Hurt performing the song to an empty amphitheater in drag. The second cut features additional scenes of singer Brett Anderson watching Hurt from the back of the darkened theatre. "Golden Gun" is used as the theme tune for Channel 4's comedy panel show You Have Been Watching, presented by Charlie Brooker.

title: Attitude (Suede song)


text:
File:TaggerungUK.jpg

Summary
Cover art for The Taggerung by Brian Jacques.

Rationale of fair use for The Taggerung

 * 1) No free or public domain images have been located for this novel.
 * 2) The image is of lower resolution than the original cover.
 * 3) The image does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute the novel in any way.
 * 4) For an article about a novel, the cover artwork is often a crucial source of critical commentary about the novel, and as such the artwork adds significantly to the article.
 * 5) This image is used on various websites, so its use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible than it already is.
 * 6) The cover is being used for informational purposes only.

title: File:TaggerungUK.jpg


text:
User talk:216.162.24.2

April 2019
Hello, I'm Wikipelli. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to John Wayne— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Wikipelli Talk  12:35, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

May 2019
Thank you for your contributions to Manslaughter, but we are trying to write an encyclopedia here, so please keep your edits factual and neutral. Our readers are looking for serious articles and will not find joke edits amusing. Remember that Wikipedia is a widely used reference tool, so we have to take what we do here seriously. If you'd like to experiment with editing, use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Ifnord (talk) 17:34, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

September 2019
Hello, I'm Serols. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Dan Bailey (American football)— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Serols (talk) 14:20, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

title: User talk:216.162.24.2


text:
Talk:Endenich

Ah, Fiddlers, I remember thee well. I've got pictures from there, but I don't think I can post any of them...Mackensen (talk) 12:41, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Endenich. 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://archive.is/20030801090049/http://www2.harmonie-bonn.de/ to http://www2.harmonie-bonn.de/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:06, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Endenich


text:
Quacky Duck and His Barnyard Friends

Quacky Duck and His Barnyard Friends was an American country rock band of the early 1970s.

It was founded by D'Andrea (Danny) Bennett and Daegal (Dae) Bennett, both sons of legendary singer Tony Bennett; they comprised the rhythm section. Other members included Curtis Fried, Gordon Javna, Jon Yaffee, and guitarist/violinist David Mansfield. The band had a modest local following in northern New Jersey and was the opening act for Gram Parsons at Max's Kansas City in New York. Their music was oriented towards lighthearted, catchy songs. The group's name evoked, as People magazine commented, "a line of bathtub toys".

The band was signed by Warner Bros. Records for $75,000 and released the album Media Push in 1974. The single "The Barnyard Song" received a smattering of airplay on WNEW-FM and the band had a national television appearance on The Mike Douglas Show. Nevertheless, they failed to gain a substantial audience and were dropped by Warner Bros.

Mansfield went on to a very successful career with Bob Dylan, The Alpha Band, and as a session musician and composer. The failure of Quacky Duck helped convince Danny Bennett that his talents lay more in business than in being a musician; as a result he later became Tony Bennett's manager and played a key role in resurrecting his father's commercial career in the 1980s and early 1990s. Dae Bennett went on to become a recording engineer. Gordon Javna became a writer and editor and oversees the popular Uncle John's Bathroom Reader series of trivia books. Fried plays bass in the Austin, Texas rock band, Cole Fried Fish.

Members

 * D'Andrea (Danny) Bennett
 * Daegal (Dae) Bennett
 * Curtis Fried
 * Gordon Javna
 * Jon Yaffee
 * David Mansfield - guitar/violin

title: Quacky Duck and His Barnyard Friends


text: Category:Eucharistic devotions

title: Category:Eucharistic devotions


text:
Talk:Apposition

more opinion needed
Suggest you see Merlin Donald, Origins of the Modern Mind, Harvard University Press, 1991, for a discussion of appositional thinking.68.3.35.239 (talk) 13:43, 15 August 2010 (UTC) Paul Bendheim, August 15, 2010

Someone did a really great job with the NPOV here. It is silent on whether or not this device should be used. It would be nice to have several schools of thought on this included. Is the apposition more commonly used in older, modern, or more formal writing? Have certain great writers used or avoided it? If you have some information on this but don't think it merits inclusion, I would still be interested. (leave a message on my talk page) thanks, --Victoria h 23:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that both are different by their very nature. Merging the two would create more confusion because an appositive is a noun phrase and has nothing to do with Apposition which deals with titles and/or names only. Grammatically the two can be similar, but in cases where one uses both, it can be a nightmare when placing commas. The only way apposition should only be shown with appositives is as a warning such as "sometimes confused with." To most people, this is not a big deal, but it is grammatically important. David, a fan...

 * I don't understand how they're different. Could you explain (and preferably provide references)? —Keenan Pepper 00:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

more opinion needed
Someone did a really great job with the NPOV here. It is silent on whether or not this device should be used. It would be nice to have several schools of thought on this included. Is the apposition more commonly used in older, modern, or more formal writing? Have certain great writers used or avoided it? If you have some information on this but don't think it merits inclusion, I would still be interested. (leave a message on my talk page) thanks, --Victoria h 23:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Are years in dates appositives?
Is the year of a date an appositive? There are thousands of July 19s, but only one July 19, 2002.
 * No, the two parts of the date refer to two different things. But the parts of "Tuesday, July 19" are in apposition, because they refer to the same thing.  Frumpet 09:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Appositive Talk
The following is the entire content of Talk:Appositive:

This page contains discussions about the "appositive" article.

Witty examples
The former witty examples illustrating Appositive built into an outstanding Wikipedia entry were not humorless and "encyclopedic" enough to satisfy User:Burschik, who suppressed the whole and substituted the current leaden and pedestrian effort, with its "Dick and Jane" numbered examples. The former entry, in its entirety, read:

In grammar, an appositive, a useful dependent noun or phrase or full clause such as this one, offers clarification or additional explanation in a condensed format. An appositive follows the word it explains, offset by commas. One 'way to identify an appositive is to ask the question: could this phrase replace the word next to it? Does this phrase make the word next to it all but unnecessary?

In this Wikipedia entry, the use of appositives and appositive phrases, grammatical devices so handy that their overuse is tempting, are identified by italics.

An appositive, grammatically incomplete, is always set off by commas, a reader-friendly invention, with one exception: LAPIDARY INSCRIPTIONS CHISELLED INTO STONE. If you do not have a chisel in your hand, you must set off an appositive with commas, though at the beginning or end of the sentence only one comma is required.

As for commas, ancient Romans scarcely knew the period at the end of a sentence.

 * ADDITIONALLYTHEYRANTHEIRWORDSTOGETHERLIKETHISAPRACTISENOTTOBEIMITATED

Not all phrases set off by commas are appositives. Some appositives are so brief— and sometimes so inevitable— that they are epithets: Alexander the Great, the Macedonian conqueror of Persia, comes to mind. But Charlemagne, "Charles the Great", has absorbed his epithet into his very name, much like his 9th-century contemporary Haroun al-Rashid, the caliph at Baghdad. Arabic personal names, daunting to the Anglophone eye,* if such metaphors may be mixed, combine a series of patronymics with an epithet or two, set "in apposition," a phrase not to confuse with "opposition.".

* a gerund phrase placed in apposition

_____

I don't think the chiseling conceit was relevant or appropriate. Just say "An appositive must be set off by commas." The chiseling thing isn't a grammatical exception, so forget about it.

I hope you laughed. Nevertheless, it's all true. Wetman 18:54, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Such a clever article, with its effective tutorial style, should be a model for others.

 * A joker added a "Cleanup" notice. I removed it. --Wetman 13:58, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I admit the article was clever. However, it was not what is generally* considered encyclopedic. Burschik 08:55, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

* By "generally" read "by resentful humorless small-town high-school graduates insurance salesmen like me"

 * I believe that Burschik's version is preferable for Wikipedia. The previous version is clever, and humorous when you think it over, but it is not sufficiently clear for an encyclopedia.  I surfed to this page and had no idea what an appositive was 5 mins ago.  I read the original text first, then Burschik's version.  The latter made it far clearer to me what an appositive is, in a simple, straight-forward, efficient manner.  That is what an encyclopedia should do.  Witty prose has it's place, but it is not what's needed here. Amelia Hunt 00:01, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, I'm sure that's truly heartfelt, Amelia. I'm glad you cared to share that with us. Tell me, do you think that wit has no genuine role to play at Wikipedia? --Wetman 00:41, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * 01-December-2006: Well, 2 years later, I think wit is okay for Talk-pages: for example, it can be said that WP is growing beyond Weakipedia as it reaches a critical mass with numerous people adding projects of indepth knowledge.  Already, the coverage is maturing, with descriptions of all 9 Beethoven symphonies, the precursor groups before the Nazi Party, and descriptions of early ships that followed the Mayflower.  However, back to the witty version about "appositive":  I, too, am in opposition to witty description of apposition since the topic is complex enough for the novice, so I suppose, for repose, the witty version, regarding appose, should remain deposed as disposed.  No wonder Shakespeare said (in Hamlet), "Less art and more matter!"  -Wikid77 06:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Error in example
"  4. Bill brought Alice along to the famous singer's wedding. Bill's friend, Alice, adored the famous singer, Dean Martin.

"... The appositives in example four are non-restrictive, since Bill's friend and the famous singer have already been identified."

The famous singer has not been previously identified, so the appositive "Dean Martin" is still restrictive. —Unsigned

 * I’m changing the first sentence to “Bill brought his friend…”, as the appositive in the second sentence is otherwise unnecessary. I think the word identified here means mentioned (“the famous singer” referring to a specific one), and I’m also changing that text accordingly. Any disagreements can be resolved by editing my edit, I’m not an English major. (See? Comma splice.) —Frungi 03:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Duplication
Why do we have this page and Apposition?

 * Because Appositives are "noun phrases" that modifies a noun, whereas appositions can be anything that modifies it.

68.166.38.31 07:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Appositive preceding a noun
the article states this is possible. Does anyone have an example? 66.41.59.162 02:50, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

 * "'King of the French', Louis-Philippe at first was broadly popular." Such a painful inversion, though, shows how much word order does count in English. --Wetman 11:08, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

"This makes them often function hyperbatons," Should this be "function as"?? -Jeff

 * I don't think so, but I don't know what a function hyperbaton is. If it were a rhetorical goal to speak a hyperbaton, then i suppose that function as hyperbatons would make sense.  This needs clarification.  Does anyone have a source for this statement?  What was meant there? O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 06:21, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Literary device?
I had an issue with one of the perspectives of the paper. I'd like to get a few opinions on this, as I'm neither a grammarian nor a linguist. What are your opinions? - grubber 03:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC) (revised 06:01, 31 January 2007 (UTC))
 * 1) I'm not sure that apposition is a literary device. It's a grammatical construct of placing two noun phrases next to one another, written with an appositive. Is it really in the same ranks with deceit and foreshadow? Further, the article literary technique doesn't even mention apposition.
 * 2) You could argue that hyperbations can use appositives, but many hyperbations dont use appositives and most appositives are not hyberbations. Are the two really that closely related?

 * Agree on both points. It's first and foremost a straightforward element of grammar. Nothing to do with specific literary style and techniques. The intro and main outline should be reworked to present it as a grammatical feature, and then at best a paragraph or section outlining its role in rhetorics/stylistics/whatever. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:28, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Can you do apposition without using an appositive? The intro seems to suggest so, but I can't come up with an example. I like grammar, so my biased view is that this article should be at Appositive; the changes you mention would be appropriate for such a move. However, the opposite action is what was done (Appositive->Apposition, according to the page history), so I'm trying to find out the motives behind that merge. - grubber 17:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Now that you mention it, these two sentences make no sense to me either: "The placing of two nouns in apposition is called an appositive. Appositives are by far the most common form of apposition." First, "the placing of" the nouns is exactly what the "apposition" itself is; on that definition "apposition" and "appositive" would seem to be exactly the same thing. And then, as you notice, an "apposition" without "appositives" doesn't really make sense - either the two terms denote the same anyway, or the second denotes an essential component of the first. I wasn't exactly familiar with a formal definition of "appositive", but the usage I looked up in Quirk et al's Comprehensive Grammar of English is: "apposition" is the grammatical construction as a whole, i.e. the relation of the noun phrases among each other; an "appositive" is a component of apposition, i.e. either of the two noun phrases that stand in apposition. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:43, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * God we're dorks :) lol. - grubber 22:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * My sources (which I can cite if desired) do not say that an appositive is a kind of apposition; rather they say that the appositive is an integral part of an apposition, specifically the limiting, commenting, or explaining part (my wording), although at least one source says that both parts are appositions. The apposition itself is a relationship or structure containing two parts.  Since the appositive is the contained part, it is properly discussed in an article on apposition (the containing structure).  (By analogy articles may properly be discussed in a treetment on noun phrases, it makes less sense to me to put the analysis of noun phrases in a  discussion on articles.)   I agree that apposition is first and foremost a grammatical structure, although like any structure it may have rhetorical uses.  (delayed by edit conflict) O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 23:08, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't object to the article staying put at Apposition. However, can you give an example of an apposition not marked by use of an appositive? It seems to that one is the concept and the other is the implementation in grammar. - grubber 23:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Some sources difine apposition as the relation (sounds like your "concept"?) betwee two or more elements; some define it as the sequence (sounds like "structure" to me) of two or mor elements. The criteria given are: 1) the two elements be coreferential; 2) both elements have the same relationship to the rest of the sentence or containing structure; 3) either of the elements may be deleted and leave a coherant grammatical structure (if the relationship/structure is restrictive, the scope of the reference will expand or shrink; if if non-restrictive, the reference [tho not the denotation] should remain unchanged).  I see no way for an apposition to lack an appositive (The idea sounds like a self-contradiction).  Here is the short pair of entries from A Glossary of Grammar and Linguistics by Andrew MacLesh:
 * apposition. Two constructions or words that are next to each other and refer to the same thing.  Our teacher, Mr. Smith, is a good one.
 * appositive. The second of two words or constructions in apposition is usually called the appositive.  In the example above, Mr. Smith, is the appositive.
 * The entire sequence Our teacher, Mr. Smith, is the apposition, but the copular relationship between our teacher and Mr. Smith is also called an apposition. The main problem with MacLeish's definition is that it is very oversimplified, especially in that:
 * His sole example is non-restrictive. He doesn't mention the restrictive cases (such as, my friend John), or the differences between them.
 * The appositive, apparently, does not have to be the second element; relatively infrequently, it is preposed. (If the apposition is non-restricive, it is marked by a comma or tonal juncture.)
 * The two elements do not have to be strictly adjacent. Again infrequently, the appositive may be extraposed.
 * I receintly translated this article for the Esperanto Wikipedia, and have since slowly been correcting and ellaborating it there. In preparation I completely copied the entries on apposition and appositive from some seventeen dictionaries (mostly grammatical and linguistic) into a rft file translating them into Esperanto as I went.  I have also ordered several more to do the same with them.  The Esperanto article is going into much greater depth. I am finding examples from the Esperanto literature for this. (Over the last few years I have collected around 80 megabytes of Esperanto literary text as my corpus.) So far I am about half way through the restrictives, and have not really gotten into the non-restrictives yet.
 * The various sources are not fully concsistant; David Crystal says in A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics, 4th ed., that there exist, however, many theoretical and methodological problems in the definition of the notion "apposition", because of the existance of several constructions which obey only some of the criteria, and where either semantic or syntactic problems are involved, as in titles and other designations (the number six, my friend John).
 * One stinker confusing the issue is that some languages (I think French is one) use a word which looks like apposition to mean what we refer to by appositive. They seem to lack a word looking like appositive and lack a single term for what we refer to by apposition.  O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 01:52, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Excellent explanation. I appreciate it. I looked up what I could and could not find the distinction. Now, we should incorporate your points into the article, as I feel the talk page is more helpful than the article! :) - grubber 02:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Not just noun phrases
Most sources are careful to say two elements, pointing out that they are often noun phrases, but need not be. Ralph M. Albaugh in his A Dictionary of Grammar and Structure gives the following non-noun-phrase examples: O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 02:09, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Adjectival. Sweet, or unsalted, butter is sold in that area.; ''An adjective modifies (clarifys, limits, explains) a noun.
 * Adverbial. He got up early — at half past five — and went outside.
 * Partly clausal. Morton's hobby, bulding model airplanes, kept him occupied.

 * Great examples. I (or whoever) will incorporate these examples into the article, as I think they are important. Your third example uses a gerund, which is also a noun phrase, no? - grubber 02:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

 * On second thought, does the first one count as apposition, since it incorporates a conjunction? - 02:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

 * First, the above three example are not mine, but Albaugh's.
 * Good point and questions! It certainly looks like a conjunction, and until a month ago I probably would have said conjunction, but note:
 * With the proper intonation, and replacing the word or with a longer pause, one gets what more clearly looks like an apposition/appositive: Sweet — unsalted — butter is sold ....  The word or seems (to me) to be functioning as a voiced parenthesis, as the meaning has not changed at all.
 * The word or here conjoins terms, not referents. Thus it seems (again to me) to be functioning in a somewhat metalinguistic fashion. (I just thought up this consideration, so I am not sure of its sigifigance.) (I linked "metalinguistic", but the article there is not very helpful.)  In contrast, your I (or whoever) above cannot, I think, despite the parenthesis, be called and apposition since it presents a disjunction of referents.
 * There is a class of appositions involving strict identity or equivalance of reference in which the appositive is presented with an expression such as: namely, that is, i.e., aka, otherwise known as, in other words.  Katie Wales iin A Dictionary of Stylistics says "Apposition" is often explicitely markes by "connectives", such as "namely",, "that is to say", "or rather", etc, especially in registers where expliciteness and clarity are important (e.g. scientific articles, official reports).  In Plena Analiza Gramatiko de Esperanto by Kalocsay and Waringhien it says in section 131 that the conjunction or is also part of this group.  On reflection, I think that a strict structuralist approach would say that in this use all these are not adverbs, not prepositions, and not conjunctions, but some as yet unnamed class, which we might call, say, preappositives, or more specifically preequivalants.  For some idiolects, perhaps we could add some uses of I mean, you know, and like'' to this class. ;-)
 * With regard to the gerund, I agree that building model airplains is also a noun phrase, or at least functions as one. Furthermore, Morton's hobby is itself a noun phrase, which doesn't serve the purpose of the example.  The building of model airplains would more clearly be a noun phrase.  Less clearly noun phrases, but still functioning as such are the complement clauses in:
 * The submariners' attempt to stop the leak was doomed. :-(
 * ''His knowledge that cosmetics are deceptive did not prevent his arousal.
 * The last two are my examples; you may use them if you see fit. Albaugh also gives the following two examples of "clauses" and "phrases" used as appositives:
 * The idea that justice will triumph underlies the plot.
 * He soon forgot his "resolution" to study every night.
 * I have been mulling on your idea the apposition is a concept which is implemented by an appositive, and that (consequently?) the article would best be labled Appositive. If I now understand this correctly, you might set up the following analogy:  Appositives are to appositions as adjectives and adverbs are to modification.  That is a nice analogy.  I had in mind something more like:  Appositive are to appositions as adjectives are to noun phrases, with most appositions being a kind of complex noun phrase themselves.  I suspect that neither analogy is wrong, that both are right, and that the word apposition has differing senses, it being just a matter of descriptive style.  Note the definition at: Merriam-Webster's Online Dictionary:  1 a : a grammatical construction in which two usually adjacent nouns having the same referent stand in the same syntactical relation to the rest of a sentence (as the poet and Burns in a biography of the poet Burns) b : the relation of one of such a pair of nouns or noun equivalents to the other.  See also SIL's Glossary of Linguistic Terms.
 * On the other hand, in your favor, I have never seen the word apposition (nor the word appositive) used in a phrase structure rule. I still prefer the article name appositive, but I think i understand the other point of view much better now.  Thanks!  O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 05:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC) p.s. Boy! It sure pays to proofread this stuff.  Both this and my previous message would have been incoherent otherwise!  O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 03:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

For a new section
I think that the current third and forth paragraphs Apposition often results when the verbs (particularly verbs of being) in supporting clauses are eliminated to produce shorter descriptive phrases. This makes them often function hyperbatons, or figures of disorder because they can disrupt the flow of a sentence. For example in the phrase: "My wife, a nurse by training,...," it is necessary to pause before the parenthetical modification "a nurse by training."

While apposition is quite common in modern prose, it has been pointed out [2] that it is rarely used in impromptu speech, which tends to make greater use of parenthesis or subordinate clauses. In ordinary speech, the preceding example would more likely be rendered: "my wife, who is a nurse by training,...." should be moved down and form a new section named something like "Usage" or "Rhetorical uses". I would place it between the current "Examples" and "References". O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 06:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Appositive examples

 * Seabirds can be highly pelagic, coastal, or in some cases spend a part of the year away from the sea entirely. --from todays WP main page, exemplifying a non-nominal (non-restrictive) equivalence relation, without that is, etc. O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 14:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm still thinking about all this.... - grubber 19:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Cancel that please - I saw "pelagic" and thought "litoral". Oops! O'RyanW (☺  ₪) 01:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

 * John and Bob, both friends of mine, are starting a band. (currently used on the page) -- is the appositive phrase ambiguous? While this would be natural in spoken language in writing it almost looks to me like it asserts that the writer has only two friends. I'm not sure though, because if I reword the genitive, it's "John and Bob, both my friends," and I'm not sure whether or not this is distinct from saying "John and Bob, both of my friends" (although I guess if I'm being overly pedantic, adding the 'of' in that case might just mean that they both are 'of his friends' -- members of the set of his friends) Is there any other way to set up the punctuation in this sentence without changing any of the words, which might preserve the intended meaning but make this more clear? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.20.132 (talk) 20:24, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * With regard to both of my friends, that is treated briefly at Genitive case. Some regard that as a "partitive": "both are members of the set of my friends"; others as an appositive: "both are my friends". TomS TDotO (talk) 14:24, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Two essential books
In addition to Quirk (1985) two books which anyone wishing to expand this article in depth should study, in my view, are: Meyer's work is corpus based. He analyzes the gradation in syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic properties from coordination through apposition to subordination that various constructions display. He also charts the differing degrees to which various genres (conversation, the press, fiction, scientific, other academic) and subgenres tend to use different types of "apposition" and speculates on the pragmatic reasons for these differences.
 * Acuña Fariña, Juan Carlos (1996) The Puzzle of Apposition, On so-called appositive structures in English. (Unuversidad de Santiago de Compostela).
 * Meyer, Charles F. (1992) Apposition in Contemporary English. (Cambridge).

Acuña reviews the literature on apposition focusing on Poutsma, Jespersen, Curme, Hockett, Chomsky, Sopher, Burton-Roberts, Bitea, Koktová, and Meyer. He strictly applies criteria for judging whether a construction is appositive. In the end only non-restrictive juxtaposed definite noun phrases, and perhaps certain adverbial constructions are left. He doubts that there is sufficient motivation for considering apposition to be a relation distinct from both coordination and modification. The non-restrictive structues are sometimes indeterminate, having a dual analysis.

I have just finished a 62K article on apposition for the Esperanto Wikipedia and will be very interested to see what develops here. O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 23:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Restrictive Appositions ???
As a linguist, I am quite surprised to hear about 'restrictive appositives'. AFAIK, the distinction between restrictives and non-restrictives applies to RELATIVE clauses, with appositives intersecting with the latter class.

For example: The man which is standing there is cool. (restrictive relative clause) Mary, who is standing there, is pretty. (non-restrictive relative clause) Mary, a trained nurse, is pretty (apposition).

IMHO the whole restrictive vs non-restrictive section should be deleted since the distinction does not apply here. Concerning punctuation, appositions must be separated by commas or dashes anyway. Sebiroth 10:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia requires sources, not the testimony of a self-proclaimed expert in the field in question. As for your point, there are quite a few constructions where commas are not used with appositives. To go with your examples: My friend Mary is pretty. Other examples are in the article. — trlkly 14:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

 * 09-Nov-2011: (3 years later) Today, a Google Search for the term "non-restrictive apositive" yields 14,900 hits. The term has been used in the U.S. for more than 40 years, and a check of the sources will show how widely the term has been used in various areas. -Wikid77 05:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

 * As a non-linguist, I'm no more surprised to hear the term, restrictive appositives, than I'm perplexed that the parochial term, restrictive relative clause, has survived in traditional linguistic circles since the 15th century. Virtually no one outside the English-speaking linguistic community knows the arcane etymology of the term, restrictive relative clause - a semantically-based rather than syntactically-based invention. The syntactically-based term, appositive, is a vast improvement over relative, but I would agree that restrictive appositive perilously adds another layer of parochialism to the discussion. Kent Dominic 05:24, 22 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kent Dominic (talk • contribs)

Appositive genitive
Would it be appropriate to include something about the "appositive genitive"? The use of the same construction which indicates possession (the gentive case, a prepositional or postpositional clause, the construct) is used in many languages to indicate apposition: Dublin's fair city, the habit of smoking, a monstrosity of a blunder, ...

TomS TDotO (talk) 16:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Appositive v. apposition: consistency needed
The article seems to use the two words interchangeably. If they are synonyms, the first part of the article needs to read "Apposition, also know as appositives...). If, however, as this talk page suggests, they are different concepts, both need to be defined explicitly, since the former redirects to the latter. Either way, there needs to be consistency in the article. Switching words midarticle is not a good idea. — trlkly 14:47, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Seconded Giddie (talk) 09:43, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Isn't appositive new or additonal info set by commas
Well I,(Rosevictor (talk) 19:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)), ask this question  is appositive new or additional info set by commas or is my English teacher is wrong If so get me a reason and why or why not. Posted By (Rosevictor (talk) 19:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)).

Apositive
You need a definition for the word You —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.193.130.250 (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Clarification
09-November-2011: Someone has tagged the term "non-restrictive apositive" to request additional text for "[clarification needed]" and so to clarify, I am rewriting the text to mention the concept as to "restrict, or limit, the scope". -Wikid77 05:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

The usage "My brain, it teems [/ with endless schemes /both good and new / for Titty-Poo, /for Titty-Poo.]"
For now i am taking the view that that usage is not an example of apposition (but rather an ungrammatical lyric, invented to fit a convenient poetic meter). In fact, i now remember that the apparently analogous "My brother, he says that ..." was a usage explicitly treated as bad speech in, probably, my public grade school in a suburb of a big northeast-coast city. (Or, if not, in the jr. high of the pop. 8k seat of a county in which about another 3k now live in even smaller "cities", 2k in incorporated villages, and 36k(!) elsewhere, and presumably farm and/or run small businesses directly serving farmers, or the farm families that (i assume) raise big families). --Jerzy•t 08:15, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

 * Linguists call it Topic and comment, not apposition. AnonMoos (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Apposition


text:
User:Mrstabby

Thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.

title: User:Mrstabby


text: User talk:64.90.243.201

title: User talk:64.90.243.201


text:
Pipkins

Pipkins (originally Inigo Pipkin) is a British children's TV programme. Hartley Hare, Pig, Topov, Octavia and the gang were the stars of ATV's pre-school series which ran from January 1973 to 29 December 1981.

Pipkins was one of the first children's programmes on British TV where the characters had regional accents: Pig had a Birmingham accent; Topov the monkey was a Cockney; Octavia the ostrich had a French accent; Pigeon had an Upper class English accent; Mrs Penguin had a Geordie accent; Uncle Hare had a West Country English accent; Sophie the cat had a non-regional English accent; and Moony the Badger had a Northern Ireland accent.

Origins
In 1972, the ITV network expanded its daytime broadcasting hours and the Independent Broadcasting Authority commissioned four of the main ITV companies to each provide a series of interest to pre-schoolers, as an alternative to the successful US import Sesame Street. From this commission Thames Television came up with Rainbow, Yorkshire with Mister Trimble, Granada with Hickory House, while ATV's contribution would be Inigo Pipkin.

Inigo Pipkin was first shown on New Year's Day 1973. When the show started, the main character was an elderly puppet maker called Inigo Pipkin (hence the original title), played by George Woodbridge. The puppets were his creations, and over the course of the first series, viewers saw Inigo bring to life Hartley Hare and the Tortoise (a.k.a. George) played by Nigel Plaskitt; and Topov the monkey, Pig and Octavia the ostrich, all played by Heather Tobias.

However, Woodbridge died suddenly from a heart attack in March 1973, while recording of the second series was still taking place. Inigo Pipkin was not recorded in the order it was transmitted, and Woodbridge had only completed taping of the latter episodes. The scripts for the episodes that would be broadcast first in the transmission run, i.e. those that Woodbridge had not managed to record, were thus hastily rewritten, with Inigo's absence explained by his being away on a fishing holiday.

In 1974, in a first for children's television, the death of Inigo was worked into the programme, predating the Mr Hooper episode on Sesame Street by nine years. From this episode onwards, the show was renamed Pipkins and Inigo's assistant, Johnny (Wayne Laryea), took over. The direction of the programme had to change; from here on, the show ceased to centre around a puppet workshop and the characters became the 'Help People', helping anyone in need of a hand. Similarly, another episode "Death of a Goldfish" dealt with the topic of death, in regards to losing a pet. Topov the monkey and Johnny discussed why the goldfish died and why people die.

Johnny left Pipkins around 1978, to be replaced by Tom (Jonathan Kydd), who moved on in 1980, his place taken by Peter Potter (Paddy O'Hagan). In later years Sue Nicholls made regular appearances as the Pipkins' neighbour, Mrs Muddle. The name was somewhat ironic as she was always a calming, self-assured presence around the puppets.

The familiar workshop set was replaced in 1979 (in the story "Moving Out"), with new interiors based around a kitchen and backyard. The new set was built up from ground level to enable puppeteers to work standing up and to move around more freely, modelled on the methods used by The Muppet Show which was also filmed at ATV Elstree Studios.

Cancellation
Pipkins ended when ATV lost its franchise for the Midlands ITV region, was restructured and became Central Independent Television. The programme was replaced by Let's Pretend.

The series was made at ATV Elstree Studios, with occasional filming on location. For the Inigo Pipkin episodes, the opening and closing titles were sung by Jackie Lee, who had earlier sung the themes to children's programmes The Adventures of Rupert Bear and White Horses.

Unusually for a children's programme, there was no spin-off Pipkins merchandise (toys, games, books etc.) produced during the programme's run.

Archive status
In common with other 1970s shows, several Pipkins episodes recorded on 625 line PAL colour videotape – including the very first Inigo Pipkin — are missing from the archives (poor storage of former ATV master colour videotapes has led to the loss of many shows), and not even any 16mm black-and-white film copies of the lost episodes exist.

Out of a total of 333 episodes, only 135 have survived. The other 197 episodes no longer exist in any format, while two others exist on 625 line PAL colour videotape only as incomplete copies (possibly due to videotape damage caused by poor storage). Nigel Plaskitt — who provided the show's narration, as well as voicing and operating Hartley and Tortoise – made off-air domestic videocassette recordings of around 56 episodes, now the only format in which these are known to exist, and some have been used for the DVD release in the UK.

title: Pipkins


text:
File:TrissUK.jpg

Summary
Book cover for US hardcover edition of Triss by Brian Jacques.

Rationale of fair use for Triss

 * 1) No free or public domain images have been located for this novel.
 * 2) The image is of lower resolution than the original cover.
 * 3) The image does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute the novel in any way.
 * 4) For an article about a novel, the cover artwork is often a crucial source of critical commentary about the novel, and as such the artwork adds significantly to the article.
 * 5) This image is used on various websites, so its use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible than it already is.
 * 6) The cover is being used for informational purposes only.

title: File:TrissUK.jpg


text:
User talk:Mrstabby

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Sjakkalle (Check!)  12:47, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mrstabby


text:
Anthony Gatto

Anthony Gatto (born Anthony Commarota on April 14, 1973) is an American juggler who holds several juggling world records. He began performing in Las Vegas at the age of ten.

Early years
Born in Manhattan and growing up in Ellicott City, Maryland, he learned to juggle at the age of 3, taught by his stepfather, Nick Gatto, a retired Vaudeville performer. By age 5, his skills had exceeded his father's. He was a juggling prodigy: world-class by the age of nine, when he won a gold medal at Circus Mondial in Paris.

He made his first television appearance at the age of 8 on the program That's Incredible! At the age of 13, he came in third place in the individual competition at the 39th annual convention of the International Jugglers Association. His family moved to Las Vegas when he was 14 in order to take advantage of the career opportunities located there.

Adult career
In 1998, Gatto met his future wife Danielle, who became his assistant during his performances. A professional dancer, Danielle added circus-style skills to her résumé to accompany her husband on circus tours. Danielle and Anthony married in 1999 and they have two children.

In 2000, he became the first and so far only juggler to win the prestigious Golden Clown award at the 24th International Circus Festival of Monte-Carlo. Between 2007 and 2009, Gatto's performance was a part of Cirque du Soleil's show Koozå. From 2010 to 2012, he was part of Cirque du Soleil's show La Nouba.

In 2012, Anthony Gatto retired from performing in Cirque Du Soleil in order to run a concrete resurfacing business "Big Top Concrete Resurfacing LLC" under his birth name of Anthony Commarota. The business was founded by him in August 2012 and is located in Orlando, Florida.

Skills
Gatto formerly shared the record for most rings juggled and caught at least once. He currently holds the following 7 juggling world records:

 * Rings
 * 7 rings for 15 minutes 5 seconds in 2011.
 * 8 rings for 1 minute 17 seconds in 1989.
 * 9 rings for 235 catches in 2005.
 * 10 rings for 47 catches in 2005.
 * Clubs
 * 6 clubs for 7 minutes 38 seconds in 2005.
 * 7 clubs for 4 minutes 24 seconds in 2005.
 * Balls
 * 9 balls for 55 seconds in 2006.

title: Anthony Gatto


text: User talk:172.159.114.38

title: User talk:172.159.114.38


text:
User talk:Tropicalsq744

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Huaiwei 12:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Find the rest of the Singapore community!
Yeap, you can find us in these pages:

 * Singapore portal
 * SGpedians' notice board
 * Singapore-related topics
 * Complete to do list
 * Singapore Wikipedians

Do leave your name at the notice board, and thanks again for joining us. I believe you will find my usename familiar! :D--Huaiwei 12:54, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comair Flight 5191
Hi Tropicalsq744, I saw your recent edit on Comair Flight 5191 regarding the plane's registration number N431CA. Can you provide a source/reference, please? Cheers, MikeZ 15:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:L1011tristarlogo.png
 Thanks for uploading File:L1011tristarlogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:50, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tropicalsq744


text:
Ribble Link

The Millennium Ribble Link is a linear water park and new navigation which links the once-isolated Lancaster Canal in Lancashire, England to the River Ribble. The Lancaster Canal was never connected to the rest of the English waterways network, because the planned aqueduct over the River Ribble was never built. Instead, a tramway connected the southern and northern parts of the canal. An idea for a connecting link following the course of the Savick Brook was proposed in 1979, and the Ribble Link Trust campaigned for twenty years to see it built. The turn of the Millennium, and the funds available from the Millennium Commission for projects to mark the event was the catalyst for the project to be implemented, and although completion was delayed, the navigation opened in July 2002.

The link is a navigation, as flows on the Savick Brook can be considerable, and there are large weirs and bywashes at each of the locks, to channel water around them. The lower end of the link is tidal, with boats passing over a rotating gate and through a sea lock to gain access. It is open from April to October, but only on certain days, based on the height of the tide, and boats can only travel in one direction on any one day. The cost of construction was nearly twice the original estimate, with just under half of it funded by the Millennium Commission. The project included footpaths, cycle tracks and a sculpture trail, to attract visitors other than boaters to visit it, and to generate economic returns for the local community. Since its construction, maintenance costs have been high, due to voids developing behind some of the lock walls, and the deposition of silt deposited by the incoming tides.

Although the link is strictly the canalisation of the Savick Brook, the Ribble Link is also used to refer to the crossing from Tarleton on the Rufford Branch of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, 4 mi of the River Douglas, the 3.5 mi journey up the River Ribble and passage along the link to the Lancaster Canal. Completing the crossing requires a little more planning than cruising on inland waterways, as the Douglas, the Ribble, and the first part of the link are tidal, but most boats make the crossing successfully. However, the Royal National Lifeboat Institution have responded to a number of callouts, where the Lytham St Annes lifeboat has had to assist vessels which have got into difficulties.

History
When originally planned, the Lancaster Canal would have crossed the River Lune and the River Ribble on aqueducts, and it was intended that there should be a link to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal to the south of the Ribble. The Lune aqueduct was completed in 1797, but the Ribble one was not built, as the construction was well over budget by the time the canal reached Preston. The canal link was eventually replaced by a tramway link, crossing the Ribble on a wooden trestle bridge. The bridge outlasted the tramway, and it was not until the 1960s that it was demolished and replaced by a new pedestrian bridge, made of concrete beams but designed to look like the old timber structure. That structure is also under threat due to degradation of the concrete and corrosion of the steel reinforcement. The Lancaster Canal remained isolated from the rest of the English Canal network.

The idea of building a connecting link between the Lancaster Canal and the rest of the English waterways system was first proposed in 1979 by John Whittaker of the Lancaster Canal Boat Club, and a feasibility study was carried out in 1981, to see if using the Savick Brook would be possible. In 1982 the Lancaster Boat Club organised a cruise from Rufford Branch of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal up the Ribble to Preston Docks to generate publicity for the scheme. The cruise demonstrated that canal boats could navigate on this section of tidal water without difficulty, and the Ribble Link Trust was set up in 1984 to push the idea frowards. Plans were nearly thwarted in 1992, when there were proposals for a bypass around Preston, which would have crossed the Savick Brook at too low a level to leave headroom for boats, and the trust worked hard to get the plans altered.

Prior to construction of the Ribble Link starting, British Waterways carried out an archeological evaluation to establish whether any important archeological sites would be disturbed by the new waterway. This identified Mill Field close to lock 8 as the probable location of a water mill, and found evidence of a ridge and furrow field system. Although the visible remains of this were unlikely to be disturbed by the construction work, parts of it continued below the surface where the channel would be excavated, and it was hoped that its boundary ditches might be located when the work took place. The Environment Agency also carried out a fish survey, using electrofishing at eight sites along the brook, to ascertain the health of the brook as habitat for course fish. The fish were categorised as predator species, rheophilic species that prefer flowing water, and limnophilic species that prefer still water. The survey recorded eleven species of fish, with rheophilic species prominent at most of the test sites, and limnophilic species much less so. Flounder were also found in great numbers throughout the river, probably because the sand and silt on the bed of the river provide good habitat for spawning and for the survival of juvenile fish. The report concluded that fish populations were surprisingly high for a river that drained an urban area, and that chub and flounder were doing particularly well.

Flows on the Savick Brook vary considerably, from as little as 110 cuft/min up to 74000 cuft/min. In order to accommodate these flows, weirs which are up to 100 ft wide were required at the locks, and the bypass channels generally use the original course of the brook. In order to allow fish to continue to move along the watercourse, fish passes would be built into the weirs. The Environment Agency raised concerns about water quality, but these were withdrawn in March 1999 after North West Water announced that they would soon be building a new interceptor sewer to run close to the Savick Brook, and the Trust agreed to make the channel slightly narrower, to improve flow speeds. When originally conceived, the navigation would have had eight locks, numbered 1 to 8 from the Ribble upwards. Lock 2A was added, to ensure that the level of the pound above lock 2 did not compromise land drainage in the locality. The locks were subsequently renumbered 1 to 9 from the Lancaster Canal downwards, in order to follow the convention used on the Glasson Dock branch. (Care should be taken when reading source documents on the construction, which use the old order).

The original route for the scheme continued along the Savick Brook into Haslam Park, and then followed the Sharoe Brook to reach the Lancaster Canal. However, delays to the start of the project meant that costs kept escalating, without an equivalent increase in funding, and constructing a route that ran alongside Tom Benson Way was a cheaper option. This new route created an impossibly tight turn after the road bridge, and so a turning basin would be needed a little further along the Savick Brook. The top three locks would be built as a three-rise staircase to lift the level of the navigation up to the level of the Lancaster Canal. When first planned the locks were to be 72 ft long, but this was reduced to 62 ft to save costs. However, this decision resulted in British Waterways receiving a number of complaints, and the Inland Waterways Association pledged £45,000 towards the extra cost for the longer locks. The Waterways Trust agree to match any funding provided by the Inland Waterways Association, and so the longer locks were reinstated at an additional cost of around £90,000. Because of the tidal nature of the lower Savick Brook, it was decided at the early stages of planning that the link would be designed for one way operation.

Much of the early engineering design work was carried out by the Babtie group, who had opened offices in Preston in the 1990s. The contract for the construction was awarded to the civil engineers Gleeson in November 2000, with Arup Water responsible for the detailed design. A partnership between British Waterways, Lancashire County Council, the Ribble Link Trust and The Waterways Trust were responsible for the management of the scheme. A separate company, The Ribble Link Construction and Operation Limited, was set up as a joint venture between the Ribble Link Trust and Lancashire County Council. Such a company was a requirement of the Millennium Commission, in order for them to release funds for the project. The Waterways Trust would be the owners of the new navigation, which would be built by Gleeson, with British Waterways acting as project managers. On completion, the navigation would be leased to British Waterways, who would then maintain it for 125 years. Just prior to work starting, the Ribble Link Construction and Operation company was handed over to the Waterways Trust, and all the original directors resigned. The Ribble Link Trust expressed disappointment at this, as they would no longer have any say in how the link was managed, despite having raised a lot of the funding for it, and been involved in its promotion for over 20 years.

Construction
Ground clearance began in February and March 2001, with the intention of constructing the lower end of the navigation first, but an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in March resulted in the surrounding agricultural land being closed for access. The middle of the route was not affected by access restrictions, and work began at lock 5 in May 2001. Once the piling was completed, the contractors moved on to lock 4. Both locks were built on dry ground between the neck of a meander. The design involved driving four rows of interlocking steel piles into the ground, using a vibrating pile driver to minimise the noise nuisance associated with such work. The inner two rows would form the lock walls, while the outer two were tied to them by steel rods to provide anchorage. Earth was then excavated from between the inner pair to form the lock chamber. Construction of the staircase locks 1, 2 and 3 began soon afterwards. The foot-and-mouth restrictions were lifted in July 2001, and work on the lower section then began.

While the locks were being constructed, the channel was widened, and in some places sharp bends were eased to ensure that boats could negotiate the turns. Lock 6 had to be built on the line of the Brook, and so a bywash was created, to enable the brook to continue to flow while the work was carried out. Lock 7 was built close to a new footbridge which had been built by the Waterway Recovery Group some years previously. The most difficult lock to build was Lock 8, as the site was affected by tides, which flooded the works of several occasions. Spoil removed from the lock site and the adjacent channel was spread on land nearby, whereas spoil from most of the excavations was removed by lorry to wasteland close to Preston Docks. Upstream of the lock, a farm bridge was replaced with a new structure, imported from Italy. The corrugated steel panels were bolted together and the structure was then craned into position. Prolonged heavy rain in late August resulted in extensive flooding, causing significant damage to the newly built banks, which were washed into the channel. A second flood occurred in mid-September, and a third on 8 October, all of which resulted in work having to be re-done.

The lock gates were built at the Northwich works of British Waterways, and were installed by engineers from British Waterways. Lock 9 consists of a single rotating gate, which is raised to retain water at a suitable level for navigation, and lowered into the bed of the canal to allow boats to pass when the level of the incoming tide reaches the level in the pound above the structure. In order to construct it, piling was used to create a coffer dam around the site. Once the concrete base had been poured, the gate was lowered into place. Near the top of the navigation, a footpath had once passed beneath the railway line, but the tunnel had been closed when the Tom Benson road was built. In order to reconnect the path, a steel walkway was attached to the side of the railway arch through which boats pass, for which permission had to be obtained from British Rail.

The bridge to carry the Lancaster Canal towpath over the connection basin entrance at the top of the canal arrived on site from the Netherlands on 26 March, but the delivery lorry could not get close enough to the site, and so it was not fitted until 3 April. Further flooding of the lower section occurred on 29 April as a result of heavy rain and a high spring tide, again resulting in significant damage to the works.

The coffer dam around the rotating sector gate was removed in June 2002, and in the same month, a British Waterways maintenance boat became the first vessel to use the waterway, when it moved from the Lancaster Canal into the connection basin above the staircase locks. A number of boats traversed the navigation in July 2002, in order to assist with the commissioning of the locks and to prove the methods of working. The boats were all owned by members of the Ribble Link Trust, who made their way from Preston Docks to the Lancaster Canal. Problems with the hydraulic swing bridge at the exit from the docks resulted in the boats leaving two hours later than expected, but a very high tide ensured that all the boats managed to pass through the sector gate before water levels dropped. The official opening took place on 20 September 2002, when Margaret Beckett, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, declared the navigation open.

Costs and funding
The Millennium Ribble Link was built to celebrate the new Millennium, and the final cost was £6.54 million, nearly twice the original estimate. The Millennium Commission offered £2.7 million towards the project, and they eventually contributed just over £3 million. The remaining £3.54 million was provided by amounts from 34 other organisations, including British Nuclear Fuels, British Waterways, operators of five landfill sites as part of the Landfill Tax Credit Scheme, The Waterways Trust, and The Ribble Link Trust. Costs escalated during the design phase, with an objection on environmental grounds from the Environment Agency, made on the day of the initial planning application, costing some £750,000 to resolve, and delaying the project by many months.

Originally £850,000 was set aside, primarily from Lancashire Waste Services Limited landfill tax credits for 125 years of maintenance. All of The Waterways Trust maintenance budget was used to fund the original over-spend and the period of maintenance reduced to 40 years.

British Waterways have spent over £2.1million on maintenance and keeping the navigation open in the first five years of operation. The Annual Report and Accounts of The Waterways Trust show a maintenance expenditure on the Ribble Link of £22,200 in 2005/6 from an income of £3,186,521 and £29,000 in 2006/7 from an income of £4,235,471.

Since it was opened, the Ribble Link had been expensive to maintain. It suffered from flooding during the winter of 2003–2004, resulting in a lot of material being depositied in the channel, and scouring of some of the bywash weirs. The link was closed and Land and Water were employed to carry out dredging in March 2004. This was hampered by low water levels due to damage to the bywash weirs and by water supplies being limited by other work taking place on the Lancaster Canal. The whole of the link needed to be dredged, and further flooding took place while the work was in progress. The cost of the operation was £124,576. The link was closed again during 2006, after voids appeared behind some of the lock structures. The work to fill the voids and to repair a lock bywash cost £360,000. Further dredging was required and cost £240,000. Some of this was achieved by conventional bucket dredging, where the material was removed and taken to landfill, but the use of 'cutter section' dredging was also trialled, after a licence was obtained from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). This involved pumping the silt over the sea lock gate when the tide was going out so that it was carried into the Ribble, and following completion of the work, the link was re-opened on 6 April 2007. The effectiveness of cutter section dredging resulted in British Waterways applying for annual licences for the process. Sludge is brought into the lower section of the link by incoming tides, and is a known problem on the Ribble. The cost of dredging to maintain the route to Preston Docks was one of the main reasons why they were closed in October 1981.

Operation
The Millennium Ribble Link follows a course to the north and west of the city of Preston along a canalisation of the Savick Brook, which is tidal along its lower reaches. The channel has been straightened and widened to allow navigation by boats with a maximum beam of 10.5 ft. One bank of the brook has been left with reed edges, to minimise the disturbance to wildlife, and artificial sand cliffs have been established where those used by nesting sand martins had to be removed as part of the engineering works. In addition to use by boats, a primary aim of the project was to create a resource which could be enjoyed and used by walkers, cyclists and anglers. There are footpaths along its banks for most of its length, and the arts trail was part of the vision to make exploring it more interesting.

The link, which is around 4 mi long from the junction with the Ribble to the junction with the Lancaster Canal, is normally only open in the summer months between April and mid-October. However, its use is restricted by the times of tides and by wind and weather conditions, and it is therefore only accessible for a limited number of days during this period. All boats wanting to use the link must pre-book a passage, by contacting the Canal and River Trust in advance. It is only operated in one direction on any one day. The sea lock at the Ribble end and the triple staircase at the Lancaster Canal end are manned by Canal and River Trust staff, whereas the rest of the locks are unmanned and are operated by boat crews. In 2022, passages could be booked on 71 days during the open season, and the number of boats that could be accommodated was restricted to four rather than six on two days when the height of the tide was at the minimum at which the link can be accessed. Generally, the direction of travel was the same for three of four days, and was then reversed for the next three or four days.

While the Ribble Link officially refers to the canalised Savick Brook, it has also come to mean the entire passage from the upgraded facilities at Tarleton on the Rufford Arm of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, travelling down 4 mi of the River Douglas to the Ribble, the journey for 3.5 mi up the River Ribble, and the new link to the Lancaster Canal. The entrance to the Savick Brook is controlled by a green light, signifying that it is safe to proceed along the link to the rotating sea lock. Boats may have to wait until tide levels are correct for the gate to be opened, and once through the gate it will be closed to retain water in the channel as the tide drops. There is a pontoon upstream of the gate where boats may have to wait again until water levels beneath Savick Bridge fall sufficiently to allow passage beneath it. The Canal and River Trust will only accept bookings for days when the tide is between 8.6 and 9.6 m, when wind speeds are below 4 or 5 on the Beaufort scale and when visibility is good.

When first opened, there was a charge for using the Ribble Link, but in February 2003, British Waterways announced that all charges for using the link and for other structures including the Anderton Boat Lift, the Falkirk Wheel and Standedge Canal Tunnel would be funded from licence fees. There is thus no charge to use the link for boats with a full Canal and River Trust licence. Pleasure craft on hire are charged £60 per passage (each way). A Skippers Guide is published by the Canal and River Trust and is normally available on their web site. Because the Ribble is tidal, boats making the crossing are required to carry extra safety equipment, over and above that which is necessary for cruising on inland waterways.

Crossing the Ribble involves navigating on tidal waters, and is inevitably a little more difficult than navigating an inland waterway. There is a relatively small window when tide levels are correct to use the sea lock at the start of the link, and this dictates the times that boats are allowed through the lock at Tarleton for the start of the journey. A maximum of six boats are allowed to make the journey on any one tide, but that normally ensures that boats can travel in convoy. The journey down the River Douglas is against the incoming tide, and engines will be required to work hard for up to four hours. If this results in the engine overheating, boaters are advised to run some hot water, to help cool it down. Most crossings are completed without incident, but slower boats or those making the crossing on a neap tide may arrive at the Savick Brook when there is insufficient water to use the sea lock, and may be diverted to Preston Docks, 1.5 mi further up the Ribble. Although most boats make the journey successfully, there has been an increase in callouts to the emergency services to aid boats that have got into difficulty. The Royal National Lifeboat Institute (RNLI) station at Lytham St Annes received five callouts in a two-month period in 2009. When a boat has become stuck on a mudbank, the normal course of action is to wait 12 hours until the next tide, when it can be refloated, but this often involves the RNLI returning late at night or early in the morning, to help the boat get to Preston Docks.

The Ribble Link Operation and Maintenance company continued to own the navigation, with British Waterways operating it on their behalf. However, in October 2011, the government announced the proposal to replace British Waterways with a charitable trust, the Canal and River Trust. Since the objectives of both trusts were similar, talks took place between them, and a decision to merge them was made. The takeover took place on 26 July 2012, and since then, the Canal and River Trust has been responsible for all aspects of the link. The Canal and River Trust state that boat sizes are restricted to 62 ft long and 10.5 ft wide. The length is not based on the size of the locks, which are 72 ft long, but the difficulty of navigating some of the bends in a longer boat, in view of the restricted channel width. Most vessels that use the Ribble Link travel along the Rufford Branch of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, and the locks on that section can only accommodate 62 ft boats.

Course
The Millennium Ribble Link was Great Britain's first inland waterway to be constructed in nearly 100 years when it was opened in July 2002, and was the first to be built for leisure purposes only, rather than for commercial use. Use of the link is restricted, as it is only open between April and mid-October, and the direction of travel changes on alternate days. The 4 mi link connects the once-isolated Lancaster Canal to the River Ribble, from where it is possible to reach the main navigable system via the River Douglas and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal's Rufford Branch. Use of the Ribble is subject to tides and weather conditions. The Millennium Commission requested that the link should include an art trail, and five works of art were installed. The top four were produced by the sculptor Thompson Dagnall, and were collectively known as Gauging the Ripple. A fifth one, also produced by Dagnall, was located near the bottom of the link. Because the link was partly funded by the Millennium Commission, they were keen that it should include features that would benefit the wider community, rather than just boaters, and so it was marketed as a linear water park, with cycle routes, footpaths, leisure areas and the arts trail, all of which were designed to attract visitors to the facility, and generate economic returns for the local community. Footpaths run from the Lancaster Canal along the Ribble Link as far as Goodier Bridge, just short of Lock 8.

The junction with the Lancaster Canal is 1.4 mi from the Preston end of the canal. Boats accessing the link pass under a towpath bridge to enter a holding basin. This leads to a three-lock staircase, which is operated by Canal and River Trust staff, and so boaters must wait in the basin until instructed to proceed. The top lock is overlooked by the first of five sculptures that form the sculpture trail. It was originally a giant wooden statue of a man, representing 'Water', but this was removed in 2008 when the wood decayed. In 2014 it was replaced by a steel sculpture produced by the sculptor Denis O’Connor of Derby. It consists of a stainless steel canal boat, with the tools used to construct canals in the 19th century, on top of a corten steel column. At the bottom of the staircase there is another basin, which boats use to turn around ready for the descent of the next locks. The Savick Brook enters the basin from the east, and the link continues to the west following the original line of the Savick Brook. To reach the basin, the brook has passed through an aqueduct carrying the Lancaster Canal, which was constructed in 1797 by John Rennie, and then flowed through the grade II listed Haslem Park. This was opened in 1910, and was a gift to the people of Preston by Mary Haslem, in memory of her father John, who owned a local cotton mill. She was particularly keen that the park should cater for the needs of children. The park includes a lake fed by water from the Lancaster Canal.

The link passes under the B6241 Tom Benson Way, immediately followed by a bridge carrying the Blackpool South branch line from Preston to Salwick, before it reaches the first of the boater-operated locks. Surplus water bypasses Lock 4 via a weir and a meander to the north of the site. The sculpture 'Fire' by Dagnall, a large block of stone polished with graphite to make it look like coal and engraved with a fossilised fern on the top, is close to the lock. The link is crossed by Savick Way before it reaches Lock 5, where the weir and meander are similar in layout to that at Lock 4. To the north of this section is a quiet public park, while to the south is the 'hay meadow', part of the Ribble Link Development, identified as being of 'national significance'. Public access is approved and welcomed. The third of Dagnall's sculptures representing 'Air', consisting of two interlocking tree trunks straddling the towpath was close to Lock 5 but was removed in 2009.

The Ribble Link continues under Leyland Bridge, which carries Lea Road, and then enters a flood plain, with housing to the south and agricultural fields to the north. A small stream called Lady Head Runnel flows southwards to join the brook. Beyond this is Lock 6 and its weir, where a sculpture representing 'Earth' consists of reclaimed gritstone slabs set into the towpath, with large footprints carved into them. The footprints are two and a half time life size, to represent those of the man at Lock 1. Tudor Avenue bridge provides access to New House Farm and the Ashton and Lea Golf Club, both of which are on the north bank of the brook. A footbridge carries a public footpath over the brook before it reaches Lock 7 with its weir, again feeding surplus water around the north side of the structure. A cycle path runs along the south bank of the brook until another footpath crosses at Goodier Bridge. Just before Lock 8 is a holding basin, where floating pontoons are available for mooring, until permission to proceed down the tidal section below the lock and to use the sea lock is given.

There is a pumping station on the left bank operated by British Nuclear Fuels, followed by a copse of semi-ancient woodland and a Biological Heritage Site reedbed at Savick Bridge, which carries the main A583 road. The wooden sculpture 'Rook' by Thompson Dagnall is located on the north bank, and can also be seen from the A583 road. Deepdale Brook joins on the right bank, and the river is crossed by the A583 road. The sea lock is a short distance below the bridge, and the brook continues to the west of Lea Marsh, until it reaches the River Ribble. Preston Docks marina is upstream from the junction, on the north bank of the Ribble, and the River Douglas, which provides the route to the Rufford branch of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal is downstream, on the south bank.

Background
The River Ribble and the Savick Brook Ribble Link are subject to outfall from a number of sources, including the Springfields nuclear fuel production facility at Salwick, to the north of Savick Bridge. A research project by the University of Portsmouth was carried out to test low cost tools for measuring water quality, with one of the pilot studies carried out on the Ribble. This was known to have failed to meet Environmental Quality Standards, due to the presence of heavy metals, organic compounds and organo-metallic compounds. The Environment Agency take samples from the estuary once a month to monitor the water quality, but the research project took samples from many more monitoring points including on the Ribble Link. Research carried out in 2006 looked at the effects of radioactive discharges from the Springfields site on those working, living or finding recreation in the locality. The site produced fuel for Magnox reactors, pressurised water reactors and advanced gas-cooled reactors at the time of the survey, although the production of Maxnox fuel ceased in 2007. Radionuclides are discharged to the air and in liquids into the environment, with levels of radionuclides dropping significantly since Maxnox fuel production stopped. At the time the site was owned by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, and operated by Springfield Fuels Ltd Westinghouse. The Ribble Link between the sea lock and lock 8 was studied as part of the aquatic survey. Sediments dredged from this section during construction were used to landscape the north-west bank of the brook, and these were tested for beta emissions. The report recommended that testing for beta and gamma dose rates could be introduced on the section of the Ribble Link below the sea lock, where beta dose rates were found to be relatively high.

The Banded Demoiselle, one of the largest and most colourful of the damselflies, has long been known from the Cuerden Valley Park. For many years this was thought to be its only Lancashire locality. However, during the late 1990s a considerable expansion of its range took place. The insect reached the Savick Brook, west of Preston, in 1997 and, by 1999, was well established there. In 1998, it was recorded on the Lancaster Canal north of Preston and also on the Leeds and Liverpool Canal at Withnell Fold.

title: Ribble Link


text:
File:LoamhedgeUK.jpg

Summary
Cover art for Loamhedge by Brian Jacques.

Rationale of fair use for Loamhedge

 * 1) No free or public domain images have been located for this novel.
 * 2) The image is of lower resolution than the original cover.
 * 3) The image does not limit the copyright owners' rights to distribute the novel in any way.
 * 4) For an article about a novel, the cover artwork is often a crucial source of critical commentary about the novel, and as such the artwork adds significantly to the article.
 * 5) This image is used on various websites, so its use on Wikipedia does not make it significantly more accessible than it already is.
 * 6) The cover is being used for informational purposes only.

title: File:LoamhedgeUK.jpg


text:
Talk:Kootenay National Park

Untitled
I just (16-Dec-2006) added a bunch of information, but now the article looks like one big blob block. The information should probably be moved around a bit and have sections similar to the Banff National Park or Yellowstone National Park entries. I will do this when I get some time Dzubint 21:39, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I added the "cleanup-restructure" tag to flag the article in case anyone else wants to go and try fixing it up. Dzubint 16:16, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Kootenay National Park. 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/20071022202212/http://www.pc.gc.ca:80/pn-np/bc/kootenay/index_E.asp to http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/bc/kootenay/index_e.asp
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070401165216/http://www.pc.gc.ca:80/docs/v-g/pm-mp/guidem-mguide/index_E.asp to http://www.pc.gc.ca/docs/v-g/pm-mp/guidem-mguide/index_e.asp

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) 23:42, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kootenay National Park. 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/20070223173648/http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/bc/kootenay/natcul/natcul4_E.asp to http://www.pc.gc.ca/pn-np/bc/kootenay/natcul/natcul4_E.asp

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) 17:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kootenay National Park


text:
File:Adventures of shark boy and lava girl poster.jpg

The Adventures of Shark Boy & Lava Girl film poster

Fair use in The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
 * 1) It's a low resolution copy of a Film Poster / VHS or DVD Cover.
 * 2) It doesn't limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the film in any way, in fact, it may encourage sales.
 * 3) Because of the low resolution, copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the artwork/image.
 * 4) The image is itself a subject of discussion in the article or used in the infobox thereof.
 * 5) The image  is significant because it was used to promoted a notable film.

Source

 * 1) Derived from a digital capture (photo/scan) of the Film Poster/ VHS or DVD Cover (creator of this digital version is irrelevant as the copyright in all equivalent images is still held by the same party). Copyright held by the film company or the artist.  Claimed as fair use regardless.