text:
Talk:Cross-docking

Cross-docking
What is "correct" way to spell it: crossdock, cross-dock or cross dock? Nsaa 11:05, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * Two articles in the current version crossdock and cross-docking. Merge these articles? Nsaa 11:17, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

I agree that these pages should be merged. Seems do be done already.

What about the cross-docking with respect to ocking algorithms? No information about that on this page?

What are "ocking" algorithms? I don't think this page has much to do with drug design. Perhaps a disambiguation page is needed?

The last section of this entry really needs work. It isn't explained well; the 'systems' reference is unclear (does it refer to IT systems?); and it includes jargon (what is a KPI?). 12:35 PDT, August 2, 2006

The last section contians Apple Singh as a factor... Apple Singh is no factor... Why is it mentioned here? In-fact Apple Singh has no meaning. It is someone's name

KPI-> is Key performance Index. Its a way of measuring performance of a system. KPI is not a jargon. It is a well known management abbreviation

This seems to read more like a press release for Wal-mart than an encyclopedic entry. Sndtech (talk) 02:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

I added a section on cross dock design. The source is John J. Bartholdi, III and Kevin R. Gue's article titled the best shape for a crossdock. Published in transportation science, vol 38, no 2, may 2004, pp. 235-244. I'm not sure how to cite a reference though and I'd appreciate if someone could add it for me.

Also, the question above about thespelling of crossdock - I see it used mostly as a single word, the Gue and Bartholdi article included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.154.37.110 (talk) 04:37, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't like the extensive use of bullets on this page but I don't know to what extent they should be written out in sentence form. Any suggestions? Smit8750 (talk) 22:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems to me that if cross docking was already used in 1930/1950, that the sentence "A computerized logistics system is needed" is incorrect. Probably this sentence can use a bit more nuance like 'this system requires all modules to be aligned seamlessly and is therefore hard to implement without a computerized system'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.35.200.100 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Cross-docking, transloading and team tracks
What are the differences or similarities between cross-docking and transloading and team track? Is one or two of things a subset of the other? Is there a way we could link these pages and clarify them? Is it possible that we might need to merge some or all of these pages and have these things as subsets? Give me your opinion on how we want to clean this up. As an example, this page for Adrian and Blissfield Rail Road's Lansing and Jackson Railroad lists all three of these under "services" seemingly implying that there are three distinct and seperate services. In that case, none of these pages need to be merged, but after reading all three, I'm having a very difficult time telling the difference between these rail services. --Criticalthinker (talk) 10:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Anyone? --Criticalthinker (talk) 14:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

i think this raises a point that needs to be addressed in the article. A cross-dock is a facility, while the action or process is cross docking. The cross docking process in fact includes some other phrases, which are all subsets of the cross docking process. These are Flow Through and Transloading. The origin of cross docking in fact is from two sides. One of the maritime to land transfer process, and the other was the rail to road. There is no right answer, so i will draft a new section and add this information for completeness. Team track is not related to the process, rather is is a siding not belonging to a railroad where loading or unloading of trains may be performed by multiple users - the people utilizing the siding may use cross docking or not. I will incorporate this.

Johnjvogt (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Looking for collaborators to work with a new editor who is a domain expert
is a new editor who has written books that might be useful in this article. The fact that he is the author creates a conflict of interest, so I reverted his changes and asked him to use the talk page to collaborate.

I don't have the time to do justice to his willingness to help out.

Please read his note to me on his talk page at User talk:Johnjvogt and the edit I undid in the article page history. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs) 🎄  20:14, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

- you don't need to write polished prose; far more important is that you can find reliable sources (WP:RS) for all of the content you think should be in the article. With this, other editors will not find it difficult to put together usable content and you can work through this material, correcting misunderstandings we may have. It's probably the easiest way to achieve neutrality (WP:N) on a topic on which you have strong opinions. — Charles Stewart (talk) 21:21, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

i have read the comments. The Cross-Dock (correct spelling for a physical location) is for the movement of physical goods only. The shape changes with size, and we could add that to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnjvogt (talk • contribs) 21:51, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

"Cross-dock" vs "Cross-docking" (was: Message of 21:54 15 December 2020)
The correct way to spell is cross-dock for the facility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnjvogt (talk • contribs) 21:54, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

(Section heading changed)

I think this needs a little more justification. The Google Ngrams corpus (which gives simple lexical queries of the books Google scanned as part of the library project they used to found Google Books) has [cross dock] as the older term, but [cross docking] exploding in popularity between 1986 and 1993, remaining the more popular term ever since 1987 (see ; the query matches sequence but ignores punctuation). We can explain the evolution of the term and document distinctions between the terms, but the policy is to prefer the more popular term even if it can be seen as "less correct", provided it is not actively confusing or prejudicial. — Charles Stewart (talk) 12:42, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Enhanced article on Cross-Docks
I have read your comments. I responded to the spelling of cross-dock, and i liked the update on shape vs size, although that is somewhat beyond most readers. I present a far more detailed article for your comments. Please comment on this article and lets enhance what is currently published!!

Contents

Concept and Understanding

Definition [1]

Types of Cross-Dock[1].

Success factors for cross-docks

Type of sortation in the cross-dock

Physical facility layout – size and shape

Management of and Improvements in a cross-dock Johnjvogt (talk) 15:41, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Concept and Understanding

Cross-docks are facilities which function without storage in supply chains [1]. The function of the supply chain with a cross-dock is to offer a point of identification of the goods and a point of sorting of the goods to make the overall supply chain efficient. The facility will receive goods from suppliers, sort and then move the goods from the cross-dock to the downstream customers as soon as an economical load is achieved. The principle holds for both port facilities and land-locked facilities and for all the potential transport types, whether for inbound or outbound movement [1,2, 3].

The cross-dock probably evolved in two industries concurrently. It originated in the railroad system, where goods were moved across the platform from one rail car to another, or in the shipping industry, where the vessel was discharged or loaded across the dock and into a rail car. Irrespective of its origin, the intent in both industries was to move goods efficiently from one mode or medium of transport to the same or another mode of transport without storage [2].

Because cross-docks offer no storage, supply chains using cross-docking are different from the supply chains using warehouses. The storage capability in a warehouse decouples the inbound movement and the outbound movements. A cross-dock operates with inbound and outbound movements linked and only slightly delayed due to staging, and therefore cannot be optimized independently from the upstream and downstream processes[1]. The classic problem and cause of failure of cross-docks is where these two processes are not synchronized and the trucks with inbound deliveries are delayed for unloading, or they are unloaded faster than the downstream deliveries occur, and the cross-dock starts to clog with goods for staging and the efficiency drops, further exacerbating the problems.

Definition [1]

The cross-dock is a facility in a supply chain, which receives goods from suppliers and sorts these goods into alternative groupings based on the downstream delivery point. No reserve storage of the goods occurs, and staging occurs only for the short periods required to assemble a consolidated, economical load for immediate onward carriage via the same mode as the receipt, or a different mode.

Cross-docks exist in many different types of supply chains, including those sending parts and assemblies to manufacturing plants, those managing finished vehicle distribution using rail based cross-docks, those involved in retail distribution, and many others. Cross-docks can add value to supply chains where the potential exists to improve transport efficiency, reduce inventory, or speed movement of products. However, enabling a value added cross docking operation first requires a clear understanding of the three types of cross-docks and the factors necessary to identify each type successfully[1].

From its origin in maritime and land transport, the term cross docking describes the process of transferring goods, without storage, from one mode of transport to another mode of transport. Different terms have evolved from these different origins, such as Flow Through and even Transloading. These are in effect subsets of the cross docking process, and represent the same characteristics of a cross-dock (the facility) where goods are removed from one mode and transferred to another, or same mode to provide overall logistics chain effectiveness. Johnjvogt (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Types of Cross-Dock[1].

All cross-docks operate without storage and are aimed at making the supply chain efficient and effective. There are three factors which differentiate the types of cross-dock: Where in the supply chain the identification of specific items for a specific customer is done; Where the primary identification and sort for the items to be delivered to a customer is done; and Whether the supplier is providing only one or multiple products which have to be consolidated.

While these three factors could result in multiple different types of cross-docks, practically only three are valid. The three types of cross-dock can be named as follows, and are differentiated primarily by the initial point of identification of the item to be shipped: •	Cross-Dock-Managed-Load (CML) •	Joint-Managed-Load (JML) •	Supplier-Managed-Load (SML)

The CML is the least efficient as the time and space required for the identification increases the size for the labelling, and adds a time delay. The JML is where the identification is done by the supplier, but the supplier sends then in a random order so a sort to match each item to an order (to ensure order integrity) is done in the cross-dock. This requires space and time, albeit less than the CML. In the SML process the items are identified when prepared for shipping, or at the end of manufacturing, and offers the greatest potential for efficiency as it minimizes the space and time in the cross-dock.

Work Done in the types of cross-dock versus the distribution center (DC) or warehouse [1, 2, 3]. A comparison of the activities or work done in a distribution center and the 3 types of cross-dock

This table shows how the SML is by far the most efficient means of moving goods to an end customer with the least amount of work done, and with no storage. The DC or warehouse performs a different function as it decouples the inbound and outbound deliveries by means of its storage.

Success factors for cross-docks [4,1]

The choice of whether a cross-dock will improve the overall efficiency of a supply chain is dependent on nine main factors, which are: •	Appropriate products •	Reliable, efficient suppliers •	Expert and reliable supply chain service providers •	Process improvement and problem-solving capability •	Uniquely skilled management and staff •	Well-chosen computer systems •	Work balancing and minimization •	Efficient physical facility design and layout •	Understanding how cross-dock based supply chains work.

It becomes evident that cross-docks need to be carefully evaluated by experts before implementation and the above factors allow for a rational and sensible evaluation.

Type of sortation in the cross-dock[1]

The cross-dock is a sortation process within its direct operation. The sortation can be done by means of manual processes or these can be automated, or there can be a combination of these. While correctly designed automation is more efficient than manual sortation, it is designed for a maximum level of throughput, which is difficult to increase. It is capital intensive and, once chosen as to the type and method of sortation, cannot accept products which are not compatible. For example, one type of sortation is the pop-up sorter, and this cannot be set for very light and for very heavy products- the weight and size have to be within specific ranges. Whereas manual sortation does allow for relatively easy scaling, but requires more people, and more space for them to work. A simple comparison is shown below to show the choice of sortation and its implications.

Physical facility layout – size and shape[4,3,1]

A large number of issues decide on the ideal shape and size of the facility, and these are interrelated. The number of outbound doors will be decided by the downstream locations to be serviced, and the volume each location receives will determine the staging space within the facility. The inbound doors will be designed to match the throughput of the facility to service these downstream locations. The type of process – SML, JML or CML – will be chosen by the agreements with the suppliers and the technology utilized. The choice will influence the shape and size as the time and space within the cross-dock is the least if the SML process is utilized, while the CML will require the most time and space. The total number of doors will then determine the perimeter requirements, while the width will largely be determined by the space to perform the processes within the facility.

Overall, the design must be to minimize the work done in the supply chain and in particular the cross-dock, where work in this case is defined by the total distance the load or item is moved, and the mass of the item [4,3,1].

Excellent work on designing and shape of the facility was done to define the optimum shape given a specific number of doors[5]. Cross-dock facilities are generally designed in an "I" configuration, which is an elongated rectangle. The goal in using this shape is to maximize the number of inbound and outbound doors that can be added to the facility while keeping the floor area inside the facility to a minimum. Bartholdi and Gue (2004) demonstrated that this shape is ideal for facilities with 150 doors or less. For facilities with 150–200 doors, a "T" shape is more cost effective. Finally, for facilities with 200 or more doors, the cost-minimizing shape is an "X”.

Management of and Improvements in a cross-dock [2,1].

The operation of a cross-dock is very similar to a continuous manufacturing process. There is no buffer of stock to decouple the inbound and outbound processes, and the operation takes place in a restricted area. While the ideal would be to have everything to be level loaded, which is where every stage of the process is operating at full capacity, the reality is the different loads delivered, the types of packages and work to be done for each load will make full capacity impossible. The most appropriate method for managing the cross-dock is to apply the principles of Theory of Constraints (TOC) and Lean Six Sigma practices, both of which seek to continuously improve the use of the resources, driving towards full utilization of the capacity of various stages to make the overall process the most efficient.

1.	Vogt, John J. 2010. “The successful cross-dock based supply chain”. Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 31, No. 1. Pp99-119. 2.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., April 2007. ”The cross-dock: a new viewpoint on the definition and the design of the facility”. Southern African Business Review Volume 11 Number 1 ISSN 1561 896 X 3.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., 2011. “Operational criteria for a successful cross-dock based supply chain”. Corporate ownership and control, vol 8, issue 4, pp 193-200. 4.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., 2010. “Implementation of cross-docks”. Corporate ownership and control, Volume 8, issue 1. 5.	Bartholdi, John J.; Gue, Kevin R. (May 2004). "The Best Shape for a Crossdock". Transportation Science. 38 (2): 235–244. doi:10.1287/trsc.1030.0077.

Johnjvogt (talk) 22:03, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * It may be a few days or even the weekend but I'll look at this. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs) 🎄  22:38, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

 * I've converted John's suggested article to use Wikipedia's markup and put it up at Draft:Cross-docking. Because it is in draftspace, there is no problem with WP:COI for to edit that text. The main neutrality issue that I see with this text, apart from the desirability of broadening reflist a bit, is that assertions about best practices need either to be supported by a consensus of experts or to be attributed as someone's opinion. There's a minor issue: the 6th source listed above is not cited; what claim does the source support? Generally, though, this looks like good material to work with and I think all the sources can be used. — Charles Stewart (talk) 13:26, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

This is very helpful, thank you. The reference #6 gives the success factors, and is not a formal reference. I am happy to drop this. Johnjvogt (talk) 13:40, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

I think it is time to publish this article, which has been expanded and commented on? David and Charles, pls assist me?!Johnjvogt (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Comment of 22 December 2020
Improved article

I have done a number of updates to the "Improved Article" as below from the valuable comments. It is intriguing to see some of the issues I missed in the first draft, so these have improved the article. If there are no major issues outstanding, how do we move this into the article so we are improving Wikipedia, or finally improve it so it can be moved???

Johnjvogt (talk) 15:46, 22 December 2020 (UTC) (This comment was moved from the top of the talk page to a new section at the bottom on 18 January 2021. It probably was meant to be one of the sections above. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)  13:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC))

Informal request for comment - replace article?
A domain expert with a conflict of interest has proposed a rewrite, see the sections above.

He has asked if this rewrite is ready. "Two heads are better than one" and our "collective intelligence" is better than just two or three of us. I'm asking the editors at WikiProject Business, WikiProject Transport, and WikiProject Systems to give this a once-over. davidwr/ (talk)/(contribs)  13:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Thanks David, I fully agree with yoy restoring the article, here, last month. It would be best for to take it one step at the time, start with one section and leave the intro as it is. -- Mdd (talk) 16:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC), (WikiProject Systems)

 * I think a section-at-a-time approach is a good suggestion. I'm concerned that has referenced the new material with sources he's authored. ~Kvng (talk) 14:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

While I understand the concept of a section replacement, this will result in a discordant article. The existing refers to unloading semis, but this is incorrect; the practice is for any mode. It also leaves a feeling of a large focus on Walmart. This article is not doing Wikipedia credit, as it has errors or restrictive views.

I am quite happy to publish the improved article without any references to my articles except the definition one if this conflict of an expert quoting their own articles (peer reviewed not just trade publications) inhibits an improvement for Wikipedia. Pls let me know as I have expended effort to provide improvement?

Johnjvogt (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

 * I, for one, am not worried about a temporarily discordant article. I don't think anyone is saying that your refs cannot be included. What we're saying is that there's a WP:COI in your doing so and so additional review is required and that's why we're asking you to introduce the changes incrementally instead of all at once. ~Kvng (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

@Kvng.

Ok, I will start to replace sections, adding a new one roughly each week

Johnjvogt (talk) 23:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

 * I'm afraid I have reverted your replacement of the lead. You've changed the topic from a focus on the practice to facilities - I don't see justification for this and I don't see it as a clear improvement. I found the first paragraph of the old lead easy to understand. I found the first paragraph of the new lead difficult to get through. When I suggested a section-by-section approach I had hoped you were going to read the existing material and make improvements to it. Instead, you want to do a wholesale replacement. Rewrite is necessary in some cases but if the article is in a reasonable and balanced starting place, correcting and copyediting the existing text is the better way to go, especially when we're negotiating a WP:COI. ~Kvng (talk) 16:37, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

That is disappointing. The full article I proposed to insert is part of this talk process, and is what multiple authors have evolved to cover the topic comprehensively and correctly. I spent 2 months improving it with the comments and covering all their concerns. I can see why you are confused, as the part replacement is confusing and I would prefer to load the full article, which everyone has commented on, in one pass so confusion does not reign.

The existing article is riddled with errors. It may be easy to understand, but it is not correct. For example, the first line contains "incoming semi-trailer truck or railroad car and loading these materials directly into outbound trucks, trailers, or rail cars, with little or no storage in between". That is not the true definition that is accepted in research today. It is any mode to any mode, with no storage; this includes aircraft and vessels of all types and descriptions. I can tear this article apart, but having taken the time to write a definitive article, get multiple parties to comment and add to the article, please review the proposed article and let me know if you want it to replace the existing article to improve Wiki??

204.15.206.230 (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Johnjvogt (talk) 18:07, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Readers should not have to read the body to understand the lead. You acknowledge that your new lead was confusing in spots. Can you focus on those issues? ~Kvng (talk) 14:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 * thank you for making improvements to your rewrite. On the whole, I still find it inferior to the existing article. We are looking for edits that make net improvements to articles. Although the rewrite does make improvements in some areas, it also makes things significantly worse in others. I have reverted the replacement again. I suggest we make incremental improvements to the existing article using content from your rewrite. I will attempt to get started on this. ~Kvng (talk) 12:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Enhanced article on Cross-Docks
Cross-Dock Wiki Updates

The cross-dock probably evolved in two industries concurrently. It originated in the railroad system, where goods were moved across the platform from one rail car to another, or in the shipping industry, where the vessel was discharged or loaded across the dock and into a rail car. Irrespective of its origin, the intent in both industries was to move goods efficiently from one mode or medium of transport to the same or another mode of transport without storage [2].

From its origin in maritime and land transport, the term cross docking describes the process of transferring goods, without storage, from one mode of transport to another mode of transport. Different terms have evolved from these different origins, such as Flow Through and even Transloading. These are in effect subsets of the cross docking process, and represent the same characteristics of a cross-dock (the facility) where goods are removed from one mode and transferred to another, or same mode to provide overall logistics chain effectiveness.

Concept and Understanding Cross-docks are facilities which function without storage in supply chains [1]. The function of the supply chain with a cross-dock is to offer a point of identification of the goods and a point of sorting of the goods to make the overall supply chain efficient. The facility will receive goods from suppliers, sort and then move the goods from the cross-dock to the downstream customers as soon as an economical load is achieved. The principle holds for both port facilities and land-locked facilities and for all the potential transport types, whether for inbound or outbound movement [1,2, 3].

The cross-dock probably evolved in two industries concurrently. It originated in the railroad system, where goods were moved across the platform from one rail car to another, or in the shipping industry, where the vessel was discharged or loaded across the dock and into a rail car. Irrespective of its origin, the intent in both industries was to move goods efficiently from one mode or medium of transport to the same or another mode of transport without storage [2].

Because cross-docks offer no storage, supply chains using cross-docking are different from the supply chains using warehouses. The storage capability in a warehouse decouples the inbound movement and the outbound movements. A cross-dock operates with inbound and outbound movements linked and only slightly delayed due to staging, and therefore cannot be optimized independently from the upstream and downstream processes[1]. The classic problem and cause of failure of cross-docks is where these two processes are not synchronized and the trucks with inbound deliveries are delayed for unloading, or they are unloaded faster than the downstream deliveries occur, and the cross-dock starts to clog with goods for staging and the efficiency drops, further exacerbating the problems.

Definition [1] The cross-dock is a facility in a supply chain, which receives goods from suppliers and sorts these goods into alternative groupings based on the downstream delivery point. No reserve storage of the goods occurs, and staging occurs only for the short periods required to assemble a consolidated, economical load for immediate onward carriage via the same mode as the receipt, or a different mode.

Cross-docks exist in many different types of supply chains, including those sending parts and assemblies to manufacturing plants, those managing finished vehicle distribution using rail based cross-docks, those involved in retail distribution, and many others. Cross-docks can add value to supply chains where the potential exists to improve transport efficiency, reduce inventory, or speed movement of products. However, enabling a value added cross-dock operation first requires a clear understanding of the three types of cross-docks and the factors necessary to identify each type successfully[1].

Types of Cross-Dock[1]. All cross-docks operate without storage and are aimed at making the supply chain efficient and effective. There are three factors which differentiate the types of cross-dock: Where in the supply chain the identification of specific items for a specific customer is done; Where the primary identification and sort for the items to be delivered to a customer is done; and Whether the supplier is providing only one or multiple products which have to be consolidated.

While these three factors could result in multiple different types of cross-docks, practically only three are valid. The three types of cross-dock can be named as follows, and are differentiated primarily by the initial point of identification of the item to be shipped: •	Cross-Dock-Managed-Load (CML) •	Joint-Managed-Load (JML) •	Supplier-Managed-Load (SML)

The CML is the least efficient as the time and space required for the identification increases the size for the labelling, and adds a time delay. The JML is where the identification is done by the supplier, but the supplier sends then in a random order so a sort to match each item to an order (to ensure order integrity) is done in the cross-dock. This requires space and time, albeit less than the CML. In the SML process the items are identified when prepared for shipping, or at the end of manufacturing, and offers the greatest potential for efficiency as it minimizes the space and time in the cross-dock.

Work Done in the types of cross-dock versus the distribution center (DC) or warehouse [1, 2, 3]. A comparison of the activities or work done in a distribution center and the 3 types of cross-dock

This table shows how the SML is by far the most efficient means of moving goods to an end customer with the least amount of work done, and with no storage. The DC or warehouse performs a different function as it decouples the inbound and outbound deliveries by means of its storage.

Success factors for cross-docks [4,1]. The choice of whether a cross-dock will improve the overall efficiency of a supply chain is dependent on nine main factors, which are: •	Appropriate products •	Reliable, efficient suppliers •	Expert and reliable supply chain service providers •	Process improvement and problem-solving capability •	Uniquely skilled management and staff •	Well-chosen computer systems •	Work balancing and minimization •	Efficient physical facility design and layout •	Understanding how cross-dock based supply chains work.

It becomes evident that cross-docks need to be carefully evaluated by experts before implementation and the above factors allow for a rational and sensible evaluation.

Type of sortation in the cross-dock[1]. The cross-dock is a sortation process within its direct operation. The sortation can be done by means of manual processes or these can be automated, or there can be a combination of these. While correctly designed automation is more efficient than manual sortation, it is designed for a maximum level of throughput, which is difficult to increase. It is capital intensive and, once chosen as to the type and method of sortation, cannot accept products which are not compatible. For example, one type of sortation is the pop-up sorter, and this cannot be set for very light and for very heavy products- the weight and size have to be within specific ranges. Whereas manual sortation does allow for relatively easy scaling, but requires more people, and more space for them to work. A simple comparison is shown below to show the choice of sortation and its implications.

Physical facility layout – size and shape[4,3,1] A large number of issues decide on the ideal shape and size of the facility, and these are interrelated. The number of outbound doors will be decided by the downstream locations to be serviced, and the volume each location receives will determine the staging space within the facility. The inbound doors will be designed to match the throughput of the facility to service these downstream locations. The type of process – SML, JML or CML – will be chosen by the agreements with the suppliers and the technology utilized. The choice will influence the shape and size as the time and space within the cross-dock is the least if the SML process is utilized, while the CML will require the most time and space. The total number of doors will then determine the perimeter requirements, while the width will largely be determined by the space to perform the processes within the facility.

Overall, the design must be to minimize the work done in the supply chain and in particular the cross-dock, where work in this case is defined by the total distance the load or item is moved, and the mass of the item [4,3,1].

Excellent work on designing and shape of the facility was done to define the optimum shape given a specific number of doors[5]. Cross-dock facilities are generally designed in an "I" configuration, which is an elongated rectangle. The goal in using this shape is to maximize the number of inbound and outbound doors that can be added to the facility while keeping the floor area inside the facility to a minimum. Bartholdi and Gue (2004) demonstrated that this shape is ideal for facilities with 150 doors or less. For facilities with 150–200 doors, a "T" shape is more cost effective. Finally, for facilities with 200 or more doors, the cost-minimizing shape is an "X”.

Management of and Improvements in a cross-dock [2,1]. The operation of a cross-dock is very similar to a continuous manufacturing process. There is no buffer of stock to decouple the inbound and outbound processes, and the operation takes place in a restricted area. While the ideal would be to have everything to be level loaded, which is where every stage of the process is operating at full capacity, the reality is the different loads delivered, the types of packages and work to be done for each load will make full capacity impossible. The most appropriate method for managing the cross-dock is to apply the principles of Theory of Constraints (TOC) and Lean Six Sigma practices, both of which seek to continuously improve the use of the resources, driving towards full utilization of the capacity of various stages to make the overall process the most efficient.

1.	Vogt, John J. 2010. “The successful cross-dock based supply chain”. Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 31, No. 1. Pp99-119. 2.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., April 2007. ”The cross-dock: a new viewpoint on the definition and the design of the facility”. Southern African Business Review Volume 11 Number 1 ISSN 1561 896 X 3.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., 2011. “Operational criteria for a successful cross-dock based supply chain”. Corporate ownership and control, vol 8, issue 4, pp 193-200. 4.	Vogt, John J. & Pienaar, W. J., 2010. “Implementation of cross-docks”. Corporate ownership and control, Volume 8, issue 1. 5.	Bartholdi, John J.; Gue, Kevin R. (May 2004). "The Best Shape for a Crossdock". Transportation Science. 38 (2): 235–244. doi:10.1287/trsc.1030.0077.

Johnjvogt (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I have taken the time to reorder and rewrite a few things to make this more entertaining and to give the concept of Cross-docking in the first introductory paragraph. Please review and comment, and then i will upload so this is a factual, correct article. Here is what i propose to upload

Cross-Dock and Cross Docking

Contents Cross Docking Concept and Understanding Definition Types of Cross-Docks Work done in the cross-dock Types of Sortation in the Cross-Dock Physical facility layout – size and shape Management of and Improvements in a cross-dock

Cross Docking The term cross docking describes the process of transferring goods, without storage, from one mode of transport to another mode of transport. Different terms have evolved from these different origins, such as Flow Through and even Transloading. These are in effect subsets of the cross docking process and represent the same characteristics of a cross-dock (the facility) where goods are removed from one mode and transferred to another, or same mode to provide overall logistics chain effectiveness.

Concept and Understanding Cross-docks are facilities which function without storage in supply chains [1]. The function of the supply chain with a cross-dock is to offer a point of identification of the goods and a point of sorting of the goods to make the overall supply chain efficient. The facility will receive goods from suppliers, sort and then move the goods from the cross-dock to the downstream customers as soon as an economical load is achieved. The principle holds for both port facilities and land-locked facilities and for all the potential transport types, whether for inbound or outbound movement [1,2, 3].

The cross-dock probably evolved in two industries concurrently. It originated in the railroad system, where goods were moved across the platform from one rail car to another, or in the shipping industry, where the vessel was discharged or loaded across the dock and into a rail car. Irrespective of its origin, the intent in both industries was to move goods efficiently from one mode or medium of transport to the same or another mode of transport without storage [2].

Because cross-docks offer no storage, supply chains using cross-docking are different from the supply chains using warehouses. The storage capability in a warehouse decouples the inbound movement and the outbound movements. A cross-dock operates with inbound and outbound movements linked and only slightly delayed due to staging, and therefore cannot be optimized independently from the upstream and downstream processes[1]. The classic problem and cause of failure of cross-docks is where these two processes are not synchronized and the trucks with inbound deliveries are delayed for unloading, or they are unloaded faster than the downstream deliveries occur, and the cross-dock starts to clog with goods for staging and the efficiency drops, further exacerbating the problems.

Definition [1] The cross-dock is a facility in a supply chain, which receives goods from suppliers and sorts these goods into alternative groupings based on the downstream delivery point. No reserve storage of the goods occurs, and staging occurs only for the short periods required to assemble a consolidated, economical load for immediate onward carriage via the same mode as the receipt, or a different mode.

Cross-docks exist in many different types of supply chains, including those sending parts and assemblies to manufacturing plants, those managing finished vehicle distribution using rail based cross-docks, those involved in retail distribution, and many others. Cross-docks can add value to supply chains where the potential exists to improve transport efficiency, reduce inventory, or speed movement of products. However, enabling a value added cross-dock operation first requires a clear understanding of the three types of cross-docks and the factors necessary to identify each type successfully[1].

Types of Cross-Dock[1]. All cross-docks operate without storage and are aimed at making the supply chain efficient and effective. There are three factors which differentiate the types of cross-dock: Where in the supply chain the identification of specific items for a specific customer is done; Where the primary identification and sort for the items to be delivered to a customer is done; and Whether the supplier is providing only one or multiple products which have to be consolidated.

While these three factors could result in multiple different types of cross-docks, practically only three are valid. The three types of cross-dock can be named as follows, and are differentiated primarily by the initial point of identification of the item to be shipped: •	Cross-Dock-Managed-Load (CML) •	Joint-Managed-Load (JML) •	Supplier-Managed-Load (SML)

The CML is the least efficient as the time and space required for the identification increases the size for the labelling, and adds a time delay. The JML is where the identification is done by the supplier, but the supplier sends then in a random order so a sort to match each item to an order (to ensure order integrity) is done in the cross-dock. This requires space and time, albeit less than the CML. In the SML process the items are identified when prepared for shipping, or at the end of manufacturing, and offers the greatest potential for efficiency as it minimizes the space and time in the cross-dock.

Work Done in the types of cross-dock versus the distribution center (DC) or warehouse [1, 2, 3]. A comparison of the activities or work done in a distribution center and the 3 types of cross-dock

This table shows how the SML is by far the most efficient means of moving goods to an end customer with the least amount of work done, and with no storage. The DC or warehouse performs a different function as it decouples the inbound and outbound deliveries by means of its storage.

Success factors for cross-docks [4,1]. The choice of whether a cross-dock will improve the overall efficiency of a supply chain is dependent on nine main factors, which are: •	Appropriate products •	Reliable, efficient suppliers •	Expert and reliable supply chain service providers •	Process improvement and problem-solving capability •	Uniquely skilled management and staff •	Well-chosen computer systems •	Work balancing and minimization •	Efficient physical facility design and layout •	Understanding how cross-dock based supply chains work.

It becomes evident that cross-docks need to be carefully evaluated by experts before implementation and the above factors allow for a rational and sensible evaluation.

Type of sortation in the cross-dock[1]. The cross-dock is a sortation process within its direct operation. The sortation can be done by means of manual processes or these can be automated, or there can be a combination of these. While correctly designed automation is more efficient than manual sortation, it is designed for a maximum level of throughput, which is difficult to increase. It is capital intensive and, once chosen as to the type and method of sortation, cannot accept products which are not compatible. For example, one type of sortation is the pop-up sorter, and this cannot be set for very light and for very heavy products- the weight and size have to be within specific ranges. Whereas manual sortation does allow for relatively easy scaling, but requires more people, and more space for them to work. A simple comparison is shown below to show the choice of sortation and its implications.

Physical facility layout – size and shape[4,3,1] A large number of issues decide on the ideal shape and size of the facility, and these are interrelated. The number of outbound doors will be decided by the downstream locations to be serviced, and the volume each location receives will determine the staging space within the facility. The inbound doors will be designed to match the throughput of the facility to service these downstream locations. The type of process – SML, JML or CML – will be chosen by the agreements with the suppliers and the technology utilized. The choice will influence the shape and size as the time and space within the cross-dock is the least if the SML process is utilized, while the CML will require the most time and space. The total number of doors will then determine the perimeter requirements, while the width will largely be determined by the space to perform the processes within the facility.

Overall, the design must be to minimize the work done in the supply chain and in particular the cross-dock, where work in this case is defined by the total distance the load or item is moved, and the mass of the item [4,3,1].

Excellent work on designing and shape of the facility was done to define the optimum shape given a specific number of doors[5]. Cross-dock facilities are generally designed in an "I" configuration, which is an elongated rectangle. The goal in using this shape is to maximize the number of inbound and outbound doors that can be added to the facility while keeping the floor area inside the facility to a minimum. Bartholdi and Gue (2004) demonstrated that this shape is ideal for facilities with 150 doors or less. For facilities with 150–200 doors, a "T" shape is more cost effective. Finally, for facilities with 200 or more doors, the cost-minimizing shape is an "X”.

Management of and Improvements in a cross-dock [2,1]. The operation of a cross-dock is very similar to a continuous manufacturing process. There is no buffer of stock to decouple the inbound and outbound processes, and the operation takes place in a restricted area. While the ideal would be to have everything to be level loaded, which is where every stage of the process is operating at full capacity, the reality is the different loads delivered, the types of packages and work to be done for each load will make full capacity impossible. The most appropriate method for managing the cross-dock is to apply the principles of Theory of Constraints (TOC) and Lean Six Sigma practices, both of which seek to continuously improve the use of the resources, driving towards full utilization of the capacity of various stages to make the overall process the most efficient.

Johnjvogt (talk) 16:06, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

 * Let's start by comparing your first paragraph with the first paragraph of the article as it exists.
 * Existing:
 * Cross-docking is a practice in logistics of unloading materials from an incoming semi-trailer truck or railroad car and loading these materials directly into outbound trucks, trailers, or rail cars, with little or no storage in between. This may be done to change the type of conveyance, to sort material intended for different destinations, or to combine material from different origins into transport vehicles (or containers) with the same or similar destinations.
 * Proposed:
 * The term cross docking describes the process of transferring goods, without storage, from one mode of transport to another mode of transport. Different terms have evolved from these different origins, such as Flow Through and even Transloading. These are in effect subsets of the cross docking process and represent the same characteristics of a cross-dock (the facility) where goods are removed from one mode and transferred to another, or same mode to provide overall logistics chain effectiveness.
 * Problems I find with your proposal here:
 * Unclear what "Different terms" and "these different origins" are referring to
 * Flow Through and Flow Through are introduced with definition or explanation
 * "cross-dock (the facility)" is an awkward construct for a definition
 * "logistics chain effectiveness" sounds like a WP:PEACOCKISH marketing buzzphrase
 * There are no wikilinks in your proposal and it is not well formatted
 * Focusing on this first paragraph, what deficiency in the existing text are you trying to address with your proposal? ~Kvng (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Time to choose
The draft at Draft:Cross-docking has not been edited in 5 months and will be a CSD G13 candidate in a month. Are there any objections to merging the draft as it stands? To preserve the history, this action must be performed by an admin. — Charles Stewart (talk) 14:43, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I've added a comment to the draft. This modification extends its life another 6 months. We can do this again and again if necessary: WP:NODEADLINES. The material from has problems that have not been resolved. Some of it may be usefully incorporated into the article and it does not have to be done by an administrator; The material was originally contributed in this article and this talk page so attribution requirements are already satisfied. ~Kvng (talk) 15:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cross-docking


text:
Duncraig, Western Australia

Duncraig is a northern suburb of Perth, the capital city of Western Australia, and is located 16 km north of Perth's central business district (CBD) between Marmion Avenue and Mitchell Freeway. Its local government area is the City of Joondalup.

History
Not much is known about Duncraig before the residential settlement boom – the majority of land in the area remained largely undeveloped until the 1960s. In 1969, the name Duncraig was approved, and was first used as a promotional name. It is of Scottish origin.

In 1967, planning stages commenced for a Marmion Town Centre with 17000 sqm of retail space by 1986 in the southwestern corner of the suburb to be developed by the Lands Department in conjunction with the Rural and Industries Bank. A mining lease for sand and limestone was held by Thiess Brothers over part of the land in question (Reserve 8018), so the Lands Department suggested a road (now Burragah Way) be built to separate the proposed centre from the lease. A detailed submission for the centre was made in 1977 by T.S. Martin and Associates, but Warwick, Karrinyup and small local centres had filled the retail need in the area and population had developed somewhat differently from original expectations, so the plan was shelved. Plans to develop a large retail centre were resurrected in the late 1980s to local protest, after which the area was the last to be developed for residential use.

The bulk of the suburb was built in the mid-1970s, with infrastructure being built almost at the same time - Davallia Primary School (February 1974), Duncraig Library (July 1974) and Duncraig Primary School (February 1975). In 1979, the Carine Glades tavern on Beach Road (now "The Carine"), Glengarry Private Hospital and Duncraig Senior High School all opened.

In 1983, the Uniting Church in Australia opened St Stephen's School, a secondary, co-educational day school, in the northeastern corner of the suburb, which expanded to include a primary school in 1993. St Stephen's School is the largest independent school in Western Australia. In 1986, the suburb was finally linked directly to the CBD via the Mitchell Freeway.

Geography
Duncraig is bounded by Beach Road to the south, Mitchell Freeway to the east, Hepburn Avenue to the north and Marmion Avenue to the west, and Warwick Road runs through the centre of the suburb. Almost all of Duncraig is residential, although many small parks and bushland areas can be found throughout. In the Northwest corner of Duncraig is a tangle of streets named after Gilbert and Sullivan characters and personalities. Gilbert Road meets Sullivan Road there, near Savoy Place, Pinafore Court, and streets named after 30 characters from the Gilbert and Sullivan operas. The only Gilbert and Sullivan performer with a street named after him is Bernard Manning (1888–1961), a performer with the J. C. Williamson company and founder of the Gilbert and Sullivan Society of Western Australia in Perth.

Facilities
Duncraig is a residential suburb, although has numerous small parks and bushland areas, and the Percy Doyle Reserve which contains a library and recreation centre. It also contains a multipurpose sports complex including several football fields and soccer pitches, lawn bowl greens and over 20 tennis courts. Several neighbourhood shopping centres are dotted throughout the suburb, the largest of which are Glengarry and Carine Glades. Carine Glades also has a tavern offering pub meals.

Nearby the Centro Warwick to the southeast, Karrinyup Shopping Centre to the south and Westfield Whitford City to the northwest provide for a wide range of retail shopping. Glengarry Private Hospital, together with a number of specialist medical centres/services are located on Arnisdale Road behind the Glengarry shopping area.

Just beyond Duncraig's southern boundary is Carine Regional Open Space, a wetland reserve centred on two large swamps which is home to many rare waterbirds, frogs, turtles and other wildlife. The space is served by walking and bicycle tracks and also offers AFL, Soccer Pitches, tennis courts and is also home to the Carine Cats baseball and teeball clubs.

Education
Duncraig contains Duncraig Senior High School (Years 7-12) and a private school operated by the Uniting Church, St Stephen's School (Years K-12). The area south of Warwick Road falls within the catchment area of Carine Senior High School (Years 7-12). Also, Duncraig contains four state primary schools:
 * Davallia (1974)
 * Duncraig (1975)
 * Glengarry (1980)
 * Poynter (1980)

Transport
Duncraig is served by the Warwick train/bus interchange at its southeastern corner, and Greenwood train station at its northeastern corner, linking the area to the Perth CBD. The suburb is also served by Transperth buses along Beach Road, Glengarry and Poynter Drives, Davallia, Lilburne and Readshaw Roads, and Marmion Avenue (423, 441, 442, 443, 444). All bus services are operated by Swan Transit.

Politics
Duncraig is a reasonably affluent suburb with many "mortgage belt" families. It consistently supports the Liberal Party at both federal and state elections, with the strongest support located in the southeastern part of Duncraig, served by the Davallia Primary polling booth.

Duncraig is administered by the City of Joondalup although previously administered by the City of Wanneroo prior to the creation of the City of Joondalup in 1998.

Notable people

 * Clint Hinchliffe, cricketer
 * Matt Parker, mathematician, author and comedian, grew up in Duncraig.
 * Melanie Perkins founded web-based graphics design software Canva in her family's Duncraig home. It is now Australia's only private company valued over US$1 billion.
 * Daniel Ricciardo, a Formula One racing driver, grew up in Duncraig.
 * Wes Robinson, cricketer

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

title: Duncraig, Western Australia


text:
Wikipedia:Today's second feature/September 4, 2005

Today's featured picture

Osteospermum 'Pink Whirls' is one of the many cultivars of the genus Osteospermum. It is particularly selected for its unusual flower. Its 13-18 purple to lavender-blue, 'spooned' petals around a blue disk, give the impression of an optical illusion. After a few days the spoon-like petals open up to form normally shaped petals. Most species of Osteospermum are native to Southern Africa, which gives rise to some of their common names such as African Daisy and Cape Daisy.

Photo credit: pdphoto.org


text:
Wikipedia:Today's second feature/September 3, 2005

Today's featured picture

Electron microscope image of the compound eye of an Antarctic krill.

Antarctic krill are shrimp-like invertebrates that live in large schools, called swarms, in the Antarctic waters of the Southern Ocean. Although the uses for and reasons behind the development of their disproportionately large, black, compound eyes remain a mystery, there is no doubt that Antarctic krill have one of the most fantastic structures for vision seen in nature.

Photo credit: Gerd Alberti and Uwe Kils


text:
User:XaosBits/Formal

Formal definition
There are two formal definitions for a dynamical system: one is motivated by ordinary differential equations and is geometrical in flavor; and the other is motivated by ergodic theory and is measure theoretical in flavor. The measure theoretical definitions assumes the existence of a measure-preserving transformation. This appears to exclude dissipative systems, as in a dissipative system a small region of phase space shrinks under time evolution. A simple construction (sometimes called the Krylov-Bogolubov theorem) shows that it is always possible to construct a measure so as to make the evolution rule of the dynamical system a measure-preserving transformation. In the construction a given measure of the state space is summed for all future points of a trajectory, assuring the invariance.

Many different invariant measures can be associated to any one evolution rule. In ergodic theory the choice is assumed made, but if the dynamical system is given by a system of differential equations the appropriate measure must be determined. Some systems have a natural measure, such as the Lioville measure in Hamiltonian systems, chosen over other invariant measures, such as the measures supported on periodic orbits of the Hamiltonian system. For many dissipative chaotic systems the choice of invariant measure is technically more challenging. The measure needs to be supported on the attractor, but attractors have zero Lebesgue measure and the invariant measures must be singular with respect to the Lebesgue measure.

For hyperbolic dynamical systems, the SRB measures appear to be the natural choice. They are constructed on the geometrical structure of stable and unstable manifolds of the dynamical system; they behave physically under small perturbations; and they explain many of the observed statistics of hyperbolic systems.

The difficulty in constructing the natural measure for a dynamical system makes it difficult to develop ergodic theory starting from differential equations, so it becomes convenient to have a dynamical systems-motivated definition within ergodic theory that side-steps the choice of measure.

Geometrical definition
A dynamical system is the tuple $$ \langle \mathcal{M}, f, \mathcal{T}\rangle $$, with $$\mathcal{M}$$ a manifold (locally a Banach space or Euclidean space), $$\mathcal{T}$$ the domain for time (non-negative reals, the integers, ...) and ft a diffeomorphism of the manifold to itself.

Measure theoretical definition

 * See main article measure-preserving dynamical system.

A dynamical system may be defined formally, as a measure-preserving transformation of a sigma-algebra, the quadruplet $$(X,\Sigma,\mu,\tau)$$. Here, X is a set, and Σ is a topology on X, so that $$(X, \Sigma)$$ is a sigma-algebra. For every element $$\sigma \in \Sigma$$, μ is its finite measure, so that the triplet $$(X,\Sigma,\mu)$$ is a probability space. A map $$\tau:X\to X$$ is said to be Σ-measurable if and only if, for every $$\sigma \in \Sigma$$, one has $$\tau^{-1}\sigma \in \Sigma$$. A map τ is said to preserve the measure if and only if, for every $$\sigma \in \Sigma$$, one has $$\mu(\tau^{-1}\sigma ) = \mu(\sigma)$$. Combining the above, a map τ is said to be a measure-preserving transformation of X , if it is a map from X to itself, it is Σ-measurable, and is measure-preserving. The quadruple $$(X,\Sigma,\mu,\tau)$$, for such a τ, is then defined to be a dynamical system.

The map τ embodies the time evolution of the dynamical system. Thus, for discrete dynamical systems the iterates $$\tau^n=\tau \circ \tau \circ \ldots\circ\tau$$ for integer n are studied. For continuous dynamical systems, the map τ is understood to be finite time evolution map and the construction is more complicated.

title: User:XaosBits/Formal


text:
Sajid & Zeeshan

Sajid & Zeeshan (ساجد عبداللہ اور ذیشان الحق pronounced as "Saa-jid and Zeesh-shaan") are a Pakistani electronic music duo from Peshawar, composed of Sajid Ghafoor (guitars and harmonicas) and Zeeshan Parwez (synths, laptops and FX modules).

Both members released their debut album through EMI in August, 2006 titled "One Light Year at Snail Speed" along with a video release of their fourth single from the album "Have to Let Go Sometime".

History
Sajid Abdullah, Zeeshan released their debut album titled One Light Year at Snail Speed through EMI Pakistan.

In 2008, Sajid & Zeeshan performed at the Coke Studio Sessions with their song, "My Happiness", along with many other artists.

Band members

 * Sajid & Zeeshan
 * Sajid Ghafoor – vocals, harmonics, lead guitar (2003–present)
 * Zeeshan Parwez – keyboards, synths (2003–present)

Discography

 * Studio albums
 * One Light Year at Snail Speed (2006)
 * The Harvest (2011)

 * Singles
 * Freestyle Dive
 * Have to Let Go Sometime
 * King of Self
 * My Happiness
 * Lambay

Awards

 * Finalists in the "Song of the Year" contest for 2004.
 * The best "Foreign Language Song" category award at the 2nd Indus Music Awards.
 * The "Best Music Video" category award at the 1st Indus Music Awards for "Freestyle Dive".
 * Nominated at "The Musik Awards" for the "Best Video" category for "Freestyle Dive".
 * Nominated at the "Lux Style Awards 2006" for the "Best Video" category for "Freestyle Dive".

title: Sajid & Zeeshan


text:
Talk:Baghdad/Archive 1

Disambig?
This page should be at Baghdad, Iraq but I don't have time to fix all the links. Sorry. Mswake 17:22 Aug 21, 2002 (PDT)

I don't believe this is necessary, unless there are several other Baghdads. See Paris, London, Glasgow, and so forth. -- CYD

 * There is a Bagdad, Florida ...

Latitude/longitude
If anyone can get a latitude and longitude for Baghdad, that'd be nice to know. Time zone it's in, too. Other info on Baghdad as it is, this seems to be largely historical stuff so far. -- JohnOwens 22:22 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)
 * Added longitude and latitude. --LeeHunter 14:21, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Formatting: use of dashes
The - dashes seemed to work better with Michael's "–" in both ASCII and Unicode, whereas before they only worked in ASCII. This one time I think I'd go with Michael's version. -- Infrogmation

They were displaying in edit mode as non-printable characters, that's why I changed them. -- Zoe

Ambiguous text?
From the article: "Points of interest include the National Museum of Iraq, whose priceless collection of artifacts was looted after the capture of Iraq by US forces."

--> Is this ambiguous? Might someone read "... was looted by US forces"? I mean, they didn't, did they?  09:27, 26 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Work needed
The recent events are woefully out of date in the first place, perhaps that whole section should be removed at least for the time being.--Ian 23:43, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree -- the current format should be converted to a section of summary of the past year's events --in the history section. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞ ]] 00:13, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"Baghdad"
"some believe it is from the Aramaic for "sheep enclosure," while others believe it is from the Persian for "gift of God."" Um, that would be Dr. Mohammed Some, would it? Some is invariably wrong: Chahar Bagh (or Char Bagh) is an Iranian and Mughal term, adopted bu the Mughal emperors for a formal garden laid out in four plots of equal size and divided by axial paths. Wetman 02:40, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't get it. You are arguing that neither of them are correct? Perhaps not, but it seems that they still are real proposed meanings. Everyking 10:23, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Image
I have seen this nice image at earthobservatory -- I'd be very nice to accompany the Iraq war section. I can't find license information on the picture though; it says "Image courtesy NASA/GSFC/MITI/ERSDAC/JAROS, and U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team". Since it's not only NASA owning the copyright, we can't be sure the picture is PD. [[User:Sverdrup|❝Sverdrup❞ ]] 10:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC).
 * Seems like it would be ok with proper credit. It's all paid for by taxpayer dollars which usually puts things in the public domain. Here's what the site says:
 * The purpose of NASA's Earth Observatory is to provide a freely-accessible publication on the Internet where the public can obtain new satellite imagery and scientific information about our home planet. The focus is on Earth's climate and environmental change. In particular, we hope our site is useful to public media and educators. Any and all materials published on the Earth Observatory are freely available for re-publication or re-use, except where copyright is indicated. We ask that NASA's Earth Observatory be given credit for its original materials.

Location
The article states: "Baghdad sits on the Tigris River at the point where the Tigris is closest to the Euphrates River, a distance of about 50 kilometres." Given that the Tigris eventually joins the Euphrates, I don't see how this can be the closest approach of the two. Would the simple "Baghdad sits on the Tigris River at the point where the Tigris is about 50 kilometres from the Euphrates River" omit anything of importance? JamesMLane 14:42, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Sounds good to me. That bit was from a site that didn't sound very authoritative. --LeeHunter 23:53, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

OK, I'll make the change. Now you've got me worrying -- what other bits are in here from that site? JamesMLane 06:20, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Trimming the History section
I've removed the following paragraphs from the History section. It seems to be too much detail for a general article on the city. Perhaps they could go somewhere else. --LeeHunter 01:53, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * A largely Shiite district of Baghdad, Sadr City, seized a certain amount of autonomy in the week following the capture. Its leaders expressed uncertainty as to whether it would return to the control of a future national civil government.

 * On August 19, 2003, The Canal Hotel, Baghdad headquarters for the United Nations, was destroyed by a car bomb, killing at least 24 people (including the senior UN enovy to Iraq, Sérgio Vieira de Mello) and wounding over 100 (see also Attacks on humanitarian workers). Other attacks, either on U.S. troops or on Iraqi civilians, especially those working for the troops, were common occurrences.

A little history...
I feel that the subject outlining the history of British occupation has been poorly outlined. The acts of Sir Arnold Wilson and others during the early 1900 occupation should certainly deserve mention. Who had the intention of creating a new state within Palestine as the home of the Jewish community in Europe? I only know fragments of the actual history, but I reiterate the fact that this bit of history certainly deserves expansion.

I didn't write the above. I would add to it there should be mention that more than a third of Baghdad's population in the 1930s was actually Arab Jews who lived integrated with their neighbors and enjoyed some status, such that after independence the Iraqi Finance Minister was even a Jew. Following the creation of the State of Israel, escalating tension led to virtually all them leaving. I realize it is a controversial subject, but a migration of such a sizable chunk of the population can't be ignored. Brassrat 16:55, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

the Sack of Baghdad
The Wikipage on Abbasid shows February 28, 1258, instead of February 10, as the date of the sack of Baghdad. Can anyone confirm this, please ? -- PFHLai 05:49, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)
 * This issue has be dealt with. Please see Talk:Abbasid. -- PFHLai 18:39, 2005 Feb 7 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 08:51, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Baghdad/Archive 1


text:
Cyberdyne

Cyberdyne may refer to:
 * Cyberdyne Inc., a Japanese company which sells a powered exoskeleton called HAL 5 (Hybrid Assistive Limb)
 * Cyberdyne (Cyber Dynamics Systems Corporation), a fictional corporation that created the Skynet system in the Terminator franchise
 * Cyberdyne, the name of a fictional manufacturer in the anime Hand Maid May

title: Cyberdyne


text: Wikipedia:Picture of the day/September 5, 2005


text: Wikipedia:POTD/September 5, 2005

title: Wikipedia:POTD/September 5, 2005


text: Category:Thaumetopoeidae

title: Category:Thaumetopoeidae


text:
Ottoman clothing

Ottoman clothing or Ottoman fashion is the style and design of clothing worn during the Ottoman Empire.

Ottoman period

While those of the palace and court dressed lavishly, common people were only concerned with covering themselves. Starting in the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, administrators enacted sumptuary laws about the clothing of Muslims, Christians, Jewish communities, clergy, tradesmen, and state and military officials, particularly strictly enforced during the reign of Suleiman the Magnificent.

In this period men wore outer clothing like the 'mintan' (a vest or short jacket), 'zıbın', 'şalvar' (trousers), 'kuşak' (sash), 'potur', entari or kaftan (long robe), 'kalpak', 'sarık' on the head, and 'çarık', çizme (boots), 'çedik', or 'Yemeni' on the feet. The administrators and the wealthy wore caftans with fur lining and embroidery, whereas the middle class wore 'cübbe' (mid-length robe) or 'hırka' (a short robe or tunic). The poor wore collarless 'cepken' or 'yelek' (vest).

Women's everyday wear was şalvar (trousers), a gömlek(chemise) that came down to mid-calf or ankle, a short, fitted jacket called a zıbın, and a sash or belt tied at or just below the waist. For formal occasions, such as visiting friends, the woman added an entari or kaftan, a long robe that was cut like the zıbın apart from the length. Both zıbın and kaftan were buttoned to the waist, leaving the skirts open in front. Both garments also had buttons all the way to the throat but were often buttoned only to the underside of the bust, leaving the garments to gape open over the bust. All of these clothes could be brightly colored and patterned. However, when a woman left the house, she covered her clothes with a ferace, a dark, modestly cut robe that buttoned all the way to the throat. She also covered her hair and face with a pair of veils.

Headgear was the most potent indicator of male social status. While commoners wore "külahs" covered with 'abani' or 'Yemeni', higher-ranking men wore a wide variety of turbans.

'Political crises of the 17th century were reflected in chaos in clothes. The excessively luxurious compulsion for consumption and showing off in the Tulip Era lasted until the 19th century. The modernization attempts of Mahmud II in the 1830s first had their effects in the state sector. While the 'sarık' was replaced by the 'fez', people employed at the Sublime Porte began to wear trousers, 'setre' and 'potin'.

Headwear
Ottoman headdresses indicated the status and occupation of the wearer. Royal turbans could be decorated with feathers in an ornamental aigrette. Starting from the 19th century, sultans started wearing fezzes instead of turbans. The daughters of sultans would receive luxurious jewelry when marrying, including diadems or veils with jewels embedded in them. Imperial and noble ladies would also cover their heads with small handkerchiefs and their faces with Brussels net veils.

There are not many records of women's clothing at the time, but artwork can provide some understanding. Headdresses were typically tall, pointed hats with a veil attached to them, which served to cover their faces during outings. In depictions of sultanas, their clothing is mostly fabricated with few references to what Ottoman women actually wore. A portrait of Roxelana depicts her wearing a pillbox-shaped headdress with decorative jewels on the border. While her headdress illustrates popular styles in Ottoman women's headwear at the time, her clothing remains very similar to European-style clothing. This was a popular way to depict women, specifically sultanas.

Many factors contributed to changes in Ottoman women's garments, including the cost of materials and firmans, or royal declarations. At the beginning of the 18th century, upper-class women began wearing yashmaks, or veils that covered their faces when going out. Over time, the yashmaks became more transparent and wider, with silver embroidery. As more changes were made to women's clothing, yashmaks and feraces were seen less as garments to cover the body, and more as decorative and ornamental styles.

In the 19th century, there were more extreme changes in women's clothing. Yemenis, or headscarves, were so thin that their hair was almost all visible. Other traditional garments combined Turkish and European fashions.

Around World War I, Turkish women began wearing headscarves tied below the chin instead of the carsaf, a robe-like dress that covered the whole body and head except for the eyes.

Tanzimat period
During the 'Tanzimat' and 'Meşrutiyet' period in the 19th century, common people still wearing traditional clothing presented a great contrast with to administrators and the wealthy wearing 'redingot', jacket, waistcoat, boyunbağı (tie), 'mintan', sharp-pointed and high-heeled shoes. Women's clothes of the Ottoman period in the 'mansions' and Palace courts included 'Entari', 'kuşak', 'şalvar', 'başörtü', and the 'ferace' of the 19th century without much change.

In the 16th century, women wore two-layer long 'entari' and 'tül', velvet shawls, on their heads. Their outdoor clothing consisted of 'ferace' and 'yeldirme'. The simplification in the 17th century was apparent in an inner 'entari' worn under a short-sleeved, caftan-shaped outfit and a matching belt.

Women's wear becoming more showy and extravagant accompanied adorned hair buns and tailoring. Tailoring in its real sense began in this period. The sense of women's wear primarily began in large residential centers such as Istanbul and İzmir in the 19th century and women gradually began to participate in social life, along with the Westernization movement. Pera became the center of fashion and Paris fashions were followed by tailors of Greek and Armenian origin. In the period of Abdul Hamid II, the 'ferace' (a concealing outer robe shaped like a modestly cut version of the indoor dress) was replaced by 'çarşaf' of different styles. However, the rural sector continued to wear traditional clothing.

Ottoman influence on Western female dress

Interactions between Ottomans and Britons occurred throughout history, but in the 18th century, European visitors and residents in the Ottoman Empire markedly increased, and exploded in the 19th century. As such, fashion is one method to gauge the increased interactions. Historically, Europeans clothing was more delineated between male and female dress. Hose and trousers were reserved for men, and skirts were for women. Conversely, in the Ottoman Empire, male and female dress was more similar. A common item worn by both was the şalvar, a voluminous undergarment in white fabric shaped like what is today called "harem pants". To British women traveling in the Ottoman Empire, the şalvar quickly became a symbol of freedom because they observed that Ottoman women had more rights than British women. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu (1689–1762), wife of the British ambassador to Constantinople, noted in her Turkish Embassy Letters that Ottoman women "possessed legal property rights and protections that far surpassed the rights of Western women". These female travelers often gained an intimate view of Ottoman culture, since as women, they had easier access to the Muslim elite harems than did men. Şalvar successfully spread into Europe at the end of the 19th century as various female suffragists and feminists used şalvar as a symbol of emancipation. Other British women of distinction, such as Lady Janey Archibald Campbell (1845–1923), and Lady Ottoline (Violet Anne) Morrell (1873–1938) wore şalvar "in an attempt to symbolize their refusal of traditional British standards and sexual differences". Şalvar also spread beyond Europe when Amelia Jenks Bloomer modified these "Turkish trousers" to create American "bloomers".

Another area where the Ottomans influenced female Western dress was in layering. Initially, layering had a practical use for the ancestors of the Ottoman Empire, who were pastoral nomads and horse riders, and needed to wear layers to adapt to changing temperatures. As the Ottoman Empire came into being, the layering of garments would distinguish one's gender, class, or rank within particular communities, while also displaying many sumptuous fabrics, thus signaling one's wealth and status. Layering also had spiritual significance. In Islamic art, layering different patterns represents a spiritual metaphor of the divine order that seems to be incomprehensible, but is actually planned and meaningful.

In Europe, in the 16th century, skirts began to have a layered appearance. Previous to the 16th century, skirts were slit only at the bottom, but now, the slit bisected the front of the skirt to reveal a contrasting layer underneath. Often, the underlayer would coordinate with a layered sleeve. Hanging sleeves were also a European concept derived from the Ottomans, although they arrived in Europe much earlier than layered skirts. In the 12th century, religious and scholarly peoples would wear coats that had hanging sleeves, similar to Turkish-style outer kaftans. These hanging sleeves meant one could see the second layer of fabric underneath the outer layer. Although hanging sleeves had been present in Europe since the 12th century, they did not escape Lady Mary Montague's fascination in the 18th century. In a letter dated 10 March 1717, she wrote to the Countess of Marabout Hafiz (Hafsa) Sultan, a woman who was a favorite of the deposed Sultan Mustafa: "But her dress was something so surprisingly rich, that I cannot forbear describing it to you. She wore a vest called donalmá, which differs from a caftan by long sleeves and folding over the bottom. It was of purple cloth, straight to her shape, and thick-set on each side, down to her feet, and round the sleeves, with pearls of the best water, of the same size as their buttons commonly are."

Republican period
The common clothing styles prevailing in the mid 19th century imposed by religious reasons entered a transformation phase in the Republican period. In this period the 'şapka' and the following 'kılık kıyafet' reform being realized with the leadership of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk in Kastamonu in 1925 had a full impact in Istanbul. Women's 'çarşaf' and 'peçe' were replaced by a coat, scarf, and shawl. Men began to wear hats, jackets, shirts, waistcoats, ties, trousers and shoes. With the industrialization process of the 1960s, women entered the work-life and tailors were substituted by readymade clothes industry. The contemporary fashion concept, as it is in the whole world, is apparent in both social and economic dimensions in Turkey as well.

Modern use
Modern Turkish designers such as Rıfat Özbek, Cemil İpekçi, Vural Gökçaylı, Yıldırım Mayruk, Sadık Kızılağaç, Hakan Elyaban, and Bahar Korçan draw inspiration from historical Ottoman designs, and Ottoman or Ottoman-inspired patterns are important to the Turkish textile industry.

Gallery
Religious garb (1878)

Folk costumes in 1873

 * Vilayet of Constantinople

title: Ottoman clothing


text:
Yanchep

Yanchep is an outer coastal suburb of Perth, Western Australia, 56 km north of the Perth CBD. It is a part of the City of Wanneroo local government area. Originally a small crayfishing settlement, it was developed by entrepreneur Alan Bond in the 1970s for the 1977 America's Cup. The area covers the urban centre of Yanchep as well as Yanchep National Park in its entirety.

Geography
Yanchep is bounded to the north-west by Two Rocks and to the south by the rural localities of Eglinton, Carabooda and Pinjar. The non-metropolitan Shires of Gingin and Chittering surround Yanchep's northern and eastern boundaries. West of Yanchep is the Indian Ocean.

For a suburb it is extremely large, covering over 220 sqkm and taking up almost the entire northern and north-eastern portion of the City of Wanneroo. Despite this, Yanchep's urban concentration is almost entirely located in an enclave generally centred around the intersection of Marmion Avenue and Yanchep Beach Road, near the coast.

History
For thousands of years prior to the arrival of Europeans, the Yanchep area was inhabited by the Indigenous Australian Noongar people, and was a noted hunting site. The name Yanchep was adapted from the Noongar word "Yandjip", or "Yanget", which is their name for the bulrush reed that is common in the wetlands of the area (compare Yangebup in the city's south). Following British settlement, the land now occupied by Yanchep was being used as a sheep station.

In 1970, Alan Bond bought approximately 8100 ha of land at Yanchep and Bond Corporation developed designs for "Yanchep Sun City" - a future satellite city of over 200,000 residents. The first houses in the area were built in 1972, and the marina at nearby Two Rocks was built as part of the same project two years later. However, sales of homes in the area had already slowed down by 1974. In 1977, the project was bought out by Tokyu Corporation after Bond Corporation began experiencing financial difficulties.

In the Western Australian State Government's "Directions 2031" urban expansion plan, Yanchep was once again highlighted as a future satellite city and major metropolitan centre.

The Smorgon family is developing the north coastal area Capricorn Beach as a planned development.

On 11 December 2019, a fire that started in Yanchep burnt over several days through about 14,000 ha across Two Rocks and into the Shire of Gingin. Approximately 6,000 homes were saved, with only one being lost. The original Yanchep petrol station, owned by local Yanchep residents, was destroyed in the fire. The once-thriving small business has been referred to as an icon of old Yanchep.

Demographics
The Australian Bureau of Statistics has identified Yanchep and Two Rocks as a significant urban area experiencing rapid growth.

As of the 2021 Australian census, Yanchep had a population of 11,022, up from the 2032 persons recorded at the 2001 census. The population is predicted to continue growing rapidly, hitting 20,702 in 2031. 57% were born in Australia, below the national average of 66.9%. Like many other northern suburbs of Perth, a significant British-born minority is present, with 17.5% listing England as their country of birth at the 2021 census.

The population share an average age of 35, close to the national average of 38. Income levels in Yanchep are near the Australian national average, with a median household income of $1,699 per week compared to $1,746 per week nationally.

In 2021, 53.2% of residents declared following no religion. This is in contrast to 2011, where 46.5% of Yanchep had residents declared a denomination of Christianity as their religious affiliation, with Anglicanism being the most populous at 24.5%. At the time 30.6% had declared no religion.

Amenities and facilities
As a suburb, Yanchep has a shopping centre with a large Woolworths, various specialty shops such as a newsagency, butcher, bakery, hair salon, travel agency, cafe, massage and nail salons and fast food outlets. A garden centre, vet and various other businesses are also located in the industrial area a few hundred metres from the shopping centre. Residents can also rely on Butler, Clarkson and Joondalup, 15–30 km south, for more shops and public services.

Yanchep is a popular tourist destination. With the Yanchep lagoon, Yanchep Inn in the National Park.

Yanchep National Park includes guided tours of Crystal Cave, bush walks, koala displays, and the Loch McNess lake. During the 1980s the area was home to popular tourist attractions including Atlantis Marine Park (in Two Rocks) and the Sun City Marina.

While there is no hospital at Yanchep, the area has a medical facility, and also has one large dedicated aged care facility with 160 high care beds available, reducing the need for travel for local families.

Education
There are currently four schools in Yanchep: Yanchep Beach Primary School, Yanchep Rise Primary School, Yanchep Lagoon Primary School and Yanchep Secondary College.

From 1975 to 2014, Yanchep District High School was the only school in Yanchep. It opened for Kindergarten to Year 7 students in 1975, later expanding to Year 10 in 1981. The school served Yanchep, Two Rocks, Carabooda and Woodridge.

In 2014, Yanchep Beach Primary School opened, catering for students from kindergarten to Year 6. It is an independent public school.

In 2018, Yanchep Secondary College opened for students from Year 7 to 11, expanding to Year 12 the following year, replacing Yanchep District High School as the local secondary school, and giving Year 11's and 12's living in Yanchep and Two Rocks the option of attending school nearby. Before Yanchep Secondary College opened, Year 11's and 12's had to travel to Mindarie Senior College or Butler College to access schooling. Yanchep District High School became a K-6 school and was renamed to Yanchep Lagoon Primary School.

A third primary school, Yanchep Rise Primary School, opened in 2021.

Transport
Yanchep Beach Road, one of the suburb's main distributor roads, links to Marmion Avenue and Wanneroo Road, two north-south arterial roads that link Yanchep to the rest of metropolitan Perth. Marmion Avenue was extended to Yanchep in 2008; Wanneroo Road was the only route to Yanchep from Perth prior to the extension.

Yanchep railway station is the terminus of the Yanchep line, which was extended by 13.8 km from Butler railway station via Alkimos and Eglinton. In the 2017 WA state budget, $441 million was allocated to build the extension, with construction having started in late 2019. The extension and Yanchep railway station were opened on 14 July 2024; a journey time of 49 minutes is envisioned from the station to the CBD, with up to 13,500 people expected to use the line every day.

The station's bus network has four bus routes. Routes 494, 495 and 496 run south to Eglinton station via Yanchep Central Shopping Centre and the residential areas of Yanchep. Route 498 runs north to Two Rocks.

Politics
Like many other northern Perth suburbs, Yanchep's population generally supports the Liberal Party at the federal level, but the Labor Party at the state level. There was considerable support for One Nation in that party's early days, and The Greens now have significant backing.

title: Yanchep


text:
Talk:Nobby Nobbs

I thought it was de Nobbs?
 * That was part of a conspiracy to rule Ankh-Morpork through the combination of the prophercy that the rightful King of Ankh served in the City Watch and a puppet ruler. Saberwyn 22:20, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I believe he also went as Count de Nobbs to the opera in Maskerade, along with Count de Tritus.

certificate of being human
 * wasnt it given to him by his midwife? not havlock
 * It is signed by the patrician. If memory serves, it was given by the midwife. 152.105.64.11 12:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

"One of the most noble families in the city, ah-ha. The Ramkins, the Selachiis, the Venturis, the Nobbses, of course . . ." From Feet of Clay

Relationship to Alf Nobbs (bledlow)
While Alf maintains no relationship to Nobby Nobbs, I seem to remember Nobby mentioning in one book that he has a relation (think it might have been a cousin) called Alphonse. Anyone else recall where this might be? Will check Feet of Clay first. --SeldooN (talk) 13:16, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nobby Nobbs


text:
CBS (disambiguation)

CBS, formerly Columbia Broadcasting System, is an American TV and radio network.

CBS may also refer to:

Businesses

 * CBS Corporation, 2005 to 2019
 * CBS Records (disambiguation), several uses
 * Christian Broadcasting System, a South Korean Christian TV network
 * Coventry Building Society, a British building society based in Coventry

National organisations

 * Centralne Biuro Śledcze Policji ('Central Investigation Bureau of Police'), a Polish police unit
 * Statistics Netherlands (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek), the Dutch national institute of statistics
 * Centre for Excellence in Basic Sciences, an autonomous Indian national institute in Mumbai
 * Israel Central Bureau of Statistics, the Israeli national institute of statistics
 * Canadian Blood Services, a non-profit charitable organization

Educational organisations

 * CBS, the name of several Christian Brothers Schools
 * CBS International Business School, Germany
 * Calcutta Boys' School, India
 * Colonel Brown Cambridge School, Dehradun, India
 * Columbia Business School, New York City, U.S.
 * Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
 * University of Minnesota College of Biological Sciences, U.S.
 * Westerdijk Institute (formerly Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures), the Dutch institute of fungus studies

Religious organisations

 * Campus Bible Study, at the University of New South Wales, Australia
 * Campus by the Sea, in Catalina Island, California, U.S.
 * Confraternity of the Blessed Sacrament, an Anglican devotional society

Science and technology

 * CBS catalyst (Corey–Bakshi–Shibata catalyst), in organic chemistry
 * CBS domain, a protein domain in molecular biology
 * CBS reduction (Corey-Bakshi-Shibata reduction), a chemical reaction
 * Charles Bonnet syndrome, a type of psychophysical visual disturbance
 * Combined braking system, on a motorcycle or scooter
 * Container-based sanitation, a toilet system
 * Component-Based Servicing, a management feature new to Windows Vista operating system
 * Concrete block structure, a building structure built from concrete masonry units
 * Cystathionine beta synthase, an enzyme
 * Credit-based shaper, in IEEE 802.1Qav time-sensitive networking

Transportation

 * Coatbridge Sunnyside railway station, Scotland, station code CBS
 * Columbus station, Wisconsin, United States, station code CBS

Other uses

 * Central Broadcasting System, or Radio Taiwan International, Republic of China radio station
 * Chronological Bible Storying, a method of orally communicating portions of the Bible
 * Conception Bay South, a town in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada, known as CBS
 * Croatia Boat Show, a boat show in Split, Croatia

title: CBS (disambiguation)


text:
Ólafur Örn Bjarnason

Ólafur Örn Bjarnason (born 15 May 1975) is an Icelandic former professional footballer who played as a centre-back. He is currently the Head of Coaching at Danish Superliga side AaB.

Club career
He started his career in Grindavík, and returned there after two years in Swedish club Malmö FF. In 2004, he moved from Grindavík to SK Brann in Bergen, Norway. His first season was successful, and he played every league match. In 2006, he formed one of Norway's strongest centre back duo with his countryman, Kristján Örn Sigurðsson, together named Örneredet (en: eagles nest).

He returned to Grindavík in August 2010 in a player/manager role. With 213 official matches for Brann, he's the most capped foreign player, and 11th most capped player in the club's history. Before the 2013 season he signed for Fram.

International career
Ólafur has been capped 27 times for Iceland. He made his début in a friendly match in June 1998 against South Africa as a substitute for Sverrir Sverrisson.

Coaching career
On 24 June 2010 returned to Grindavík and was named as their new head coach, he replaced Milan Stefán Jankovic. After the 2011 season he quit as manager, but decided nonetheless to play for them in the 2012 season. On September 9, 2013, Ólafur confirmed that he was hanging up his boots.

In early 2014, Ólafur became manager of the Norwegian club FK Fyllingsdalen. He held this position until the end of 2016, when he became manager of Egersunds IK from New Year 2017. Ólafur retired from Egersund in the summer of 2018 and shortly after got a job in the Norwegian Football Federation in the Agder region, in a role as KA Coach Development. He held this role until May 2023.

In the winter of 2023, Ólafur started working as Head of Academy at Stabæk. He left that position in July 2024 when he accepted a job as Head of Coaching at Danish club AaB.

Norway

 * Norwegian Premier League: 2007
 * Norwegian cup: 2004

title: Ólafur Örn Bjarnason


text:
Jack Mercer (cricketer)

John Mercer (22 April 1893 – 31 August 1987) was the main bowler for Glamorgan in their early years in the County Championship. He bowled medium pace and could swing the ball both ways, whilst when wickets were affected by rain he was able to get on a good deal of off-break. He suffered during his career from Glamorgan's lack of agile, athletic fieldsmen, which meant he was often plagued by dropped catches – otherwise his figures would have been much better. On occasions, he was a dangerous tail-end batsman, who once hit Wilfred Rhodes for 36 runs from 3 overs and hit Dick Howorth for 31 runs off an eight-ball over in his last season with Glamorgan. John Arlott said of him, "he bowled more overs, conceded more runs, took more wickets, scored the fastest 50, made more ducks and was not out more often than anyone else in the county's history".

Beginnings
Mercer was born in Southwick, West Sussex, and began his cricket with Sussex after World War I in 1919. He found he had very little opportunity because Sussex had so many medium-pace bowlers of similar type on their professional staff, notably Maurice Tate and the Relf brothers. Mercer got a bit of bowling in 1920 but his lack of opportunities in 1921 led him to qualify for the newly promoted first-class county Glamorgan.

100 Wickets
He started slowly, but by 1925 – when Glamorgan's utterly abysmal batting caused them to suffer a record number of defeats in the Championship – he was a well-established bowler and took over 100 wickets for the first time.

Awards
The following year, with Glamorgan's batting much improved, the county rose to eighth and Mercer's superb bowling – highlighted by eight for 39 against Gloucestershire and the dismissal of Somerset for 59 and 77 on a sticky wicket at Cardiff Arms Park – put him in second place in the averages and won him a Cricketer of the Year nomination from Wisden in a year when an Ashes tour intensified competition for the honour.

Touring
Mercer then went on tours of India and Ceylon without doing anything spectacular, and in 1927 when pitches were almost always soft and wet (often so much so as to be really easy for batting) he did not do as well as expected until late in the season. However, in 1929 with fourteen for 119 against the touring South Africans, Mercer perhaps justified those who wondered why he was always overlooked for representative cricket.

1929-1937
In this season, he claimed a personal best 145 wickets, but strains in his thigh caused a gradual decline during the early 1930s and Mercer did not even take 50 wickets in 1934. However, 1935 and 1936 saw him back at his very best, with the latter season seeing him take all ten wickets in an innings at New Road, Worcester and twelve wickets for 123 against Leicestershire. He finished the season with 116 wickets when no other Glamorgan bowler exceeded 46, but in 1937 he lost so much form that he was in and out of the team. Ordinarily, Glamorgan would have ended Mercer's contract, but the erratic availability of their best bowlers meant he stayed with them for another two years, during which he produced his famous hitting spree against Worcestershire at Cardiff when Glamorgan were faced with certain defeat (the weather saved them).

1939 onwards
During 1939, Glamorgan announced Mercer would not be retained for 1940, but war brought an end to county cricket until 1946. Mercer then took up an appointment as coach of Northamptonshire, and even played one match for them at the extraordinary age of fifty-four. Mercer's vitality was shown by the fact that he lived to the age of ninety-four, dying in Westminster in 1987.

title: Jack Mercer (cricketer)


text:
User:ChewT/Planes

One of my hobbys is finding and collecting pictures of planes. I will list a few of my collection here. =)
 * Small Pictures
 * X-15
 * Medium Sized Pictures
 * Lots of X-planes
 * A cargo plane
 * Large Pictures
 * F14
 * F15

title: User:ChewT/Planes


text:
Oblivious (American game show)

Oblivious (rendered on screen as Obliviou$) is a hidden camera comedy game show based on the British format by Tiger Aspect Productions and Mast Media of the same name.

Gameplay
Host Regan Burns would take a camera crew with him and ask unsuspecting people trivia questions, while playing some sort of role. The person being asked the questions did not know they were on TV until after Burns finished asking the questions, but usually he would do one final bit in his role before revealing the truth. For every question the contestant got correct, they received $20 in cash. Five questions usually were asked per person, for a possible $100.

At the start of the show, and before and after commercial breaks, Burns would walk up next to someone on the street and ask a single question for $20, before saying "We'll be right back" or a similar phrase. On some occasions, this money was refused.

Once per episode, there was a speed round, where contestants could get $20 for every question they answered correctly within one minute. At the end, contestants got a chance at a $100 bonus question, with that amount in cash given to them if they got it right.

Once per episode, Burns would give the unsuspecting contestant a chance at up to $500 more (this was called the Lightning Round), if s/he would take on the role of quizmaster. He would walk them through it using a hidden camera and a headset microphone out of view, and for every question that the next contestant got right, the first player got $100. (The other player got $20 per correct answer regardless.)

Sometimes other actors pretend to win money with the contestant.

Disguises
These are some of the disguises played by the host:

 * Florist
 * Janitor
 * Artist
 * Tennis Instructor
 * Video store worker
 * Camera store worker
 * Travel agent
 * Hollywood agent
 * Clown
 * Gas station attendant
 * Spanish person that sung songs at Taco Bell
 * A man getting married at Taco Bell
 * Bartender
 * Hospital patient
 * Boxing referee

title: Oblivious (American game show)