text:
White Ladies Priory

White Ladies Priory (often Whiteladies Priory), once the Priory of St Leonard at Brewood, was an English priory of Augustinian canonesses, now in ruins, in Shropshire, in the parish of Boscobel, some eight miles (13 km) northwest of Wolverhampton, near Junction 3 of the M54 motorway. Dissolved in 1536, it became famous for its role in the escape of Charles II of England after the Battle of Worcester in 1651. The name 'White Ladies' refers to the canonesses who lived there and who wore white religious habits.

Origins
The origins and exact date of foundation of the priory are not known: the latter part of the 12th century is generally accepted as the period of establishment. The surviving ruins show work typical of the late 12th century, and the first documentary evidence dates from 1186 or earlier. In it, Emma, daughter of Reynold of Pulverbatch, in the process of giving land to Haughmond Abbey near Shrewsbury, mentions that she has already granted a virgate of land in Beobridge to the white nuns of Brewood. The publication of this information by the important Shropshire historian Robert William Eyton in 1856 directly contradicted his own conviction, published only a year earlier, of a date in the reigns of Richard I of England or John, as well as casting into doubt older traditions linking the priory with Archbishop Hubert Walter. Eyton thought the priory a Cistercian house, which is now known to be incorrect, but his documentary research still gives the earliest known date by which it must have been founded.

Emma's grant placed the priory in Brewood, which is in the neighbouring part of Staffordshire, not Shropshire: it was simply the nearest village of any size and the priory has never lain within the boundaries of Brewood parish. The priory was in an extra-parochial area, and its location gives no clues to the identity of its founder. The priory acquired the church and some tithes at Montford very early in its history. So it is possible that the Lacy family or the FitzAlans, who succeeded them as holders of the manor of Montford with Forton, may have been important in its founding. William FitzAlan, Lord of Oswestry was a powerful marcher lord, closely associated with the cause of Empress Matilda during the Anarchy, who was a prominent and generous supporter of Shropshire's Augustinian houses. He was closely associated with the founding of Haughmond Abbey, while Wombridge Priory was founded by his vassals with his support. He was also a benefactor of Lilleshall Abbey. The advowson of Lilleshall Abbey belonged the Zouche family, who were also associated with White Ladies. However, there is no documentary evidence connecting any known figure to the founding of White Ladies: only clues in the historical context. No lay person claimed the right to nominate or approve the appointment of a prioress, or to exploit the estates during vacancies: only the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield ever intervened.

Dedication and order
The dedication was to Leonard of Noblac, a saint associated with the liberation of prisoners, who was extremely popular after a number of alleged miracles earlier in the 12th century. The dedication is attested fairly early in the history of the priory: for example, a 1212 charter of King John says it is a confirmation monialibus Sancti Leonardi de Brewud – to the nuns of St Leonard at Brewood.

It is now accepted that the priory belonged to the Augustinian order. John Leland was commissioned in 1533 by Henry VIII to investigate the libraries of religious houses in England. As part of his duties, he visited White Ladies shortly after its dissolution in 1536. He originated the false idea that White Ladies was a Cistercian house. Certainly Cistercians wore a white habit, while the color of the Augustinian habit could vary, the primary element being the wearing of a white, linen rochet, similar to that of the canons. However, the register of Richard Swinefield, a 14th-century Bishop of Hereford, clearly refers to transferring rights to prioressse et conventui albarum monialium sancti Leonardi de Brewod, Coventrensis et Lichefeldensis diocesis, ordinis sancti Augustini: "the prioress and convent of St Leonard of Brewood, (in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield,) of the Order of St Augustine." Leland's mistake led William Dugdale and some subsequent authors to include it among the houses of that order. The white habit made it easy to distinguish between the canonesses of St Leonard's Priory and the black-clad nuns of the Benedictine house that lay a short distance to the east in Brewood parish, Staffordshire, which was known in contradistinction as Black Ladies Priory.

Estates and finances
White Ladies benefited considerably from royal generosity in the reign of John. He visited Brewood on at least three occasions and it was possibly on one of these that he gave the priory a weir called Withlakeswere on the River Severn near Bridgnorth, which would create fishing rights. This was later rented out to a local man, Henry FitzRobert, half by Prioress Alditha in 1225 at 5 shillings, and the other half subsequently by Prioress Cecilia, also at 5 shillings. White Ladies must have held 12 bovates of land at Calverton in Nottinghamshire from early in its history but in 1212 a charter of King John removed all secular demands and obligations stemming from it. Issued during the Interdict, this demonstration of the king's piety was witnessed by a group of notables, headed by a favourite, William d'Aubigny, 3rd Earl of Arundel. This foothold in Sherwood Forest was enlarged, at least in value, by John's son, Henry III. On 8 December 1232, while visiting Shrewsbury, he granted the priory the right to assart, enclose and cultivate an acre and a half in the woods near Calverton. In 1241 he allowed the priory to assart and cultivate as they wished a further three acres of land which they already held but were half covered in dead oaks. These areas were enhanced in value by being taken out of waste and exempted from the control of royal forest officials.

Another relatively distant possession of White Ladies was the church at Tibshelf in Derbyshire, the advowson of which must have been granted early in the history of the priory. In 1291 the Taxatio Ecclesiastica of Pope Nicholas IV assessed the rectory as worth £8 but also recorded £1 going to the nuns of Brewood. Early in the following century the priory moved to appropriate the church: essentially taking over the tithes and employing a vicar to serve the church and its congregation. In order to obtain a licence from Edward II to appropriate the church into mortmain, the prioress and convent had to part with a fine of £10, a very large sum for the priory at any stage in its history. The licence was duly granted on 1 November 1315. Evidently the details of the transaction took some time to work out, as it was not until 7 July 1319 that Bishop Walter Langton was able to issue an ordinance defining the vicar's allotment of land and directing that he be paid 40 shillings annually, divided into equal payments at Easter and Michaelmas. This was reinforced by a papal ordinance, which erroneously attributed to the priory a dedication to St Lawrence. Evidently Tibshelf proved a good long-term investment: before the dissolution, the Valor Ecclesiasticus reported Tibshelf bringing in £5 6s. 8d. However, to continue holding the rectory, the priory was required to pay a pension of 20 shillings a year to the vicars of Lichfield cathedral, a condition not mentioned in Langton's ordinance but in force by 1402 at the latest, as in that year the Archdeacon of Stafford's court passed an ordinance on its payment.

Beside its holdings in the East Midlands, the priory held many very small pieces of property, mostly donated by local families, around Brewood and scattered across Shropshire to its south and west. On 6 October 1254, for example, Philip de Beckbury, in response to a fine levied at Westminster, agreed to pay the priory one mark annually as rent for two mills at Beckbury. In 1256 William de Ercall, and Prioress Agnes engaged in a complicated series of lawsuits, including a fine of lands, to transfer to the convent a very small rent (a ninth of the sheaves on three carucates of land) and small piece of land for a weir. This involved settling any competing claim that might come from Wombridge Priory. Some small transfers represented the dowries of canonesses on their admission to the community. Bartholomew Terret gave a virgate in Lawley as dowry for his sister Gundred. Richard de Harley and his wife Burga went to considerable trouble and expense to donate property and rights to the priory, the most important being the advowson of Bold church, which was in southern Shropshire and part of the Diocese of Hereford. On 11 May 1309 Bishop Swinefield asked the dean and chapter of Hereford Cathedral to approve the transfer of the advowson from Harley to White Ladies. He issued an ordinance to this effect on 3 August. As it involved an alienation in mortmain, the transfer required royal approval, and this could only be secured through payment of a fine. Edward II's licence was issued on 6 August, permitting the transfer of a messuage and half a virgate of land at Bold, in addition to the advowson. This was probably to provide a dowry for Alice de Harley, who later became prioress. In the longer term, the value of Bold declined greatly, probably as a result of declining population, and the income proved insufficient to maintain a priest, prompting Bishop Thomas Mylling to issue an ordinance on 10 October 1481, amalgamating the church with that of neighbouring Aston Botterell. Although a pension of ten shillings, payable each Michaelmas, was promised to White Ladies, Bold was bringing in only 6s. 8d. in 1536.

The Belmeis family, closely involved in the foundation of Lilleshall Abbey during the 12th century, turned their generosity to White Ladies in the 13th and 14th. It seems that the priory already had substantial holdings in the Belmeis manor of Donington by the mid 13th century, as Joanna, widow of Walter de Belmeis was forced to seek a settlement of her dower in 1256 by suing the prioress for a third part of 100 acres. John de Belmeis petitioned Edward I for permission to grant the priory ten acres of land and ten of wood in Donington and the king ordered an inquest on 1 May 1304. The inquest found that the land was part of a much larger estate John held of Alan la Zouche and that it was worth 3s. 4d. per year. After payment of a fine, a licence for the alienation in mortmain was issued on 18 May from Stirling, where the king was besieging the castle. In July 1315 his son Hugh also secured an inquest into a proposed grant of 30 acres of wood. The inquest found the land to be worth 5 shillings per year. On 1 November, the day he licensed the appropriation of Tibshelf church, Edward II also permitted, for a fine of £5, the grant of 30 acres to the priory by Hugh de Beumeys.

The priory, like other monastic houses, was not immune from the changes in the economic climate and generally sought to adjust. For example, the expanding population and rising market of the 13th century meant that pasture land was brought under increasingly close management, which posed dangers for small landholders and tenants, like White Ladies. The priory must have acquired a small estate at Rudge, near Pattingham but within Shropshire, some time before 1292 as in that year Prioress Sarra (Sarah) sued William de Rugg, the lord of the manor for denying her use of common pasture. Unlike some of the other cases brought to court, this was not a fictitious issue intended to create a record. The jury found that William had contravened his tenants' historic rights and deprived them of pasture they required for their animals through enclosures designed to improve his estate. He counter-sued the prioress and others for breaking down his fence. However, Sarah and the other tenants won their cases. It seems that White Ladies was dogged in defending common pasture. In 1305 the prioress of the time, possibly still Sarah, arraigned an assize of novel disseisin to assert her rights against William Wycher, who seems to have been particularly aggressive in enclosing commons after taking control through marriage of the manor of Blymhill, which neighboured the priory demesne. The situation changed greatly after the agrarian crisis of 1315–22 and even more so after the onset of the Black Death in Shropshire during Spring 1349. The overall result was to encourage leasing of demesnes, a trend that affected monastic estates as much as those of lay landholders. This persisted for more than a century and, when prices began to rise in the 16th century, White Ladies, like other religious houses, found itself with most of its land on long-term leases at low fixed rents, leaving it barely able to meet outgoings. When the priory property was sold in 1540, some of these long leases were revealed: a lease of 1471 in the reign of Edward IV, was for 99 years, so would not expire until well into the reign of Elizabeth I. Unable to adjust its rents upwards to allow for inflation, the priory had little left to pay for repairs and the condition of the buildings suffered.

By the Dissolution, White Ladies had lands, property or rights at Brewood, Bridgnorth, Beckbury, Berrington, Chatwall (in Cardington), Donington, High Ercall, Clee St. Margaret, Humphreston (in Donington), Ingardine (in Stottesdon), Highley, Rudge, Haughton (probably in Shifnal), Sutton Maddock, Tong, Shrewsbury, Montford and other villages in the West Midlands. There were also properties in Calverton and Tibshelf. The demesne and other lands around Brewood brought in £10 9s. 6d. Mountford was very valuable, bringing in £8, and it was followed by Tibshelf, worth £5 6s. 8d., and Calverton, £2. A small property at Highley was the only other property worth more than a pound: £1 10s. 8d.

Building

The church building was a simple cruciform, sandstone structure, with a nave of five bays, and a chancel of three bays. The transepts were small and without chapels. Today, the lay-out of the building is still easy to discern, although little remains of either transept, and only the north wall of the nave and chancel is fairly intact. There is a fine, round-headed Romanesque arch leading into the north transept, through which the residents would have passed to reach the cloister and the monastery. The windows on the north side are largely intact, making it easy to identify the bays of both nave and chancel. The south wall would have been windowed in the same way. It seems that the stone for the church was obtained locally – perhaps even in a field adjacent to the site, as one of the fish ponds seems to have been created from a quarry scoop.

Monastic life
The priory was occupied by canonesses regular of the Augustinian Order. Strictly, they were not nuns, but the term was used of them in the Middle Ages and still is. Although named after Saint Augustine of Hippo, the Rule of St. Augustine is actually a brief medieval document setting out guidelines for a religious life. It allowed its followers more access to the outside world than the stricter Benedictine Rule, and was more suited to a community involved with parish life. Many Augustinians were canons regular, who operated mainly outside the walls of a religious house, and are often confused with the Augustinian friars. As opposed to abbeys of "secular canonesses", these lived largely enclosed lives, in a manner similar to that of nuns, and the residents of White Ladies fell into this category. The conventual buildings are long-gone, and may have been timber-framed, but appear to have stood against the north wall of the church. Charles II commissioned a painting of the later house around 1670, and details of the painting suggest that it may have incorporated parts of the prioress' residence, which must have stood west of the main priory buildings and cloister.

The priory normally supported five canonesses and a prioress, although there would also have been some servants, both lay and clerical, resident and non-resident. Chief among these in 1535 were the seneschal, at that time Thomas Giffard drawing a fee of 16s. 8d., and the chaplain, who was paid £5.

Generally the convent was autonomous, but this was subject to the inspection and confirmation of the ordinary, in this case the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. Roger Northburgh was a particularly activist bishop, a zealous administrator and intermittently powerful politician. In 1326 Northburgh intervened when two canonesses, Elizabeth la Zouche and Alkice de Kallerhale, left the priory. He arranged for a notice to be read in churches, making clear that they should, when found, be admonished to return within ten days and threatening both them and their abettors with excommunication. It is possible that there were problems with leadership in the priory, as Prioress Joan de Hugford resigned in 1332. On 29 May Northburgh intervened again when he discovered that there had been informality in the election of Alice de Harley to replace Joan. He cancelled the election and, having heard of the suitability of Alice for the post, re-appointed her on his own authority and mandated his own chaplain to induct her. Northburgh also instigated a canonical visitation of White Ladies while Alice de Harley was prioress, probably in 1338. She was censured for expensae voluptariae, expenditure on pleasure, relating to her extravagant dress and the keeping of canes venatici, greyhounds or other hunting dogs, in the convent, and for a general laxity of discipline. She was warned not to admit more nuns than the house's revenues could support and to cut out unnecessary expenditure. Alice died in 1349, shortly after the initial onset of the Black Death, and the chapter agreed to submit the election of her successor, Beatrice de Dene, to Northburgh. On 29 July he issued an ordinance appointing Beatrice and ordering the Archdeacon of Stafford to carry out the installation.

Decay and dissolution
When Prioress Alice Wood retired in 1498, she was assigned the income from Tibshelf, about a fifth of the total revenues, as a pension, but Bishop Arundel required that she pay for her own food if she stayed at Brewood. From about that date, serious decline seems to have set in – probably because most of the income came from leases at fixed rents in a time of inflation. In 1521 it was found that, although the priory was actually not in debt, the prioress, probably Margaret Sandford, did not know how to render account and two canonesses claimed they were still owed their monthly incomes. In 1524 the dormitory was reported to be in bad repair. In 1535, White Ladies Priory was reported to have revenues of only £31 1s. 4d. Expenses came to £13 10s. 8d, including £5 for the chaplain. The next year's figures were almost identical. This brought White Ladies well under the threshold of the Suppression of Religious Houses Act 1535, which dissolved all houses worth less than £200 per annum, clear of expenses.

Local magnates and speculators began to manoeuvre for the property before the priory was dissolved. Lord Stafford really wanted Ranton Priory, close to his own residence at Stafford, but, as he explained in a letter of 28 May 1536 to Ralph Neville, 4th Earl of Westmorland, this was already earmarked by George Blount, the uncle of the king's illegitimate son, Henry FitzRoy. However, White Ladies would do as a substitute, as it would be cheap at only £40 per annum, if "in great decay." Stafford was at Stafford Castle again in March 1537, when Lutcote, a royal household official, was sent with papers dissolving the priory, but he considered the asking price too high for all interested parties and wrote to Thomas Cromwell restating his interest in Ranton. There were still four canonesses in residence early in 1538. By May, however, the dissolution was complete, and in July the king's grants included several relating to White Ladies. A pension of £5 went to the prioress, Margaret Sandford (rendered as Stamford), while the site went to William Skeffington (also Skevington) of Wolverhampton and a number of the smaller estates were leased.

After dissolution
The reversion was sold to in 1540 William Whorwood and his wife, Margaret. Whorwood was then Solicitor General but soon to be appointed Attorney General. This made the Whorwoods the effective owners of White Ladies, but Skeffington retained the 21 lease at an annual rent of £10 9s. 6d. The Whorwoods purchased the reversion not just the site and demesne of the priory, but those of a number of other former White Ladies estates and other monastic property in the region. These included some on 21 and 31 year leases, granted by the Crown in 1538 but some much on much earlier, very long leases at low rents. In 1471 Prioress Joan Shirley had let a messuage in Overton, Shropshire for 99 years at a rent of 6s. 8d., while in 1484 she had let another at Humphreston in Albrighton for 81 years at 7s. 8d. Prioresses Margaret Cowper had in 1499 let property at Rudge for 70 years and as late as 1529 Margaret Sandford had granted a lease of 61 years.

It was almost certainly Skeffington who built a house on the site of White Ladies, probably incorporating some of the prioress's residence. When he died in 1550, it would have passed to his wife, Joan, who subsequently married Edward Giffard, son of Thomas Giffard of Chillington, the former seneschal. It is unclear whether Skeffington or Joan or Giffard paid off the Whorwoods, but the property certainly became part of the Giffard family's estates. After Edward, White Ladies passed to his son, John, who extended the old farm buildings north of the priory site to create Boscobel House about 1630. In 1651, it belonged to John Giffard's daughter, Frances Cotton, at that time a widow. The Giffards were Catholics and the most important Recusants in the area. They were strong supporters of the royalist cause in the English Civil War. Their servants too were all Catholic. White Ladies was not occupied by Frances Cotton during the escape of Charles II. It was being run by housekeepers and servants. Among the tenants of the estate were five brothers called Penderell. (There had been six but one was killed at the Battle of Edgehill.) The Penderell family were small farmers but the sons seem to have worked part of their time as woodmen, farm servants and retainers of the Giffard family, living at different places in the neighbourhood and caring for some houses such as White Ladies Priory and Boscobel House, which is about a mile away.

Charles Giffard, a cousin of Frances, escorted King Charles to White Ladies Priory early on 4 September 1651, after riding through the night after the Battle of Worcester the previous day. They were admitted by George Penderell, a servant of the house, who sent for Richard Penderell, who lived in a farm house nearby, and for their elder brother William, who was at Boscobel. After failing to cross the River Severn, Charles returned to the estate on 6 September and spent the day in the grounds of Boscobel House hiding in the famous Royal Oak.

Frances Cotton, née Giffard, died shortly after these events, and both White Ladies and Boscobel passed via her daughter, Jane Cotton, who had married Basil Fitzherbert in 1648, to the Fitzherbert family of Norbury Hall, Derbyshire. Part of the house was still standing in 1791, as shown in a sketch by Edward Williams, vicar of St Mary Magdalene's Church, Battlefield. The estate and Boscobel were sold to Walter Evans, a Derbyshire industrialist, in 1812, but the Fitzherbert family retained the White Ladies site. In 1884, the head of the Fitzherbert family became Lord Stafford, and in 1938 Edward Fitzherbert, 13th Baron Stafford placed White Ladies in the care of the Office of Works, a government department.

Whilst the priory is now gone, the remains of its medieval church and the 19th-century boundary wall of the small graveyard still remain and are currently under the care of English Heritage. The graveyard was used by Catholic families until 1844, when St Mary's church at Brewood was consecrated.

Prioresses
The following list, which is inevitably incomplete, is based on the list given in the Victoria County History account of the priory.

 * Aldith occurs about 1225.
 * Cecily occurs after 1225.
 * Agnes acquired rents on two mills in Beckbury by a fine levied in 1254 and gained various small concessions from William of Ercall in 1256 by a fine levied at Shrewsbury.
 * Sarah campaigned against enclosures at Rudge in 1292.
 * Joan occurs, 1315.
 * Joan of Hugford, who may be identical with the previous Joan, resigned 1332.
 * Alice of Harley was elected in 1332 and died in 1349.
 * Beatrice de Dene was elected 1349.
 * Margaret Corbet occurs in 1377 and 1381.
 * Joan Fillilode presented John Janyns, called a chaplain, perhaps of the priory itself, to Bold church on 15 January 1409.
 * Isabel Creghton died 1463.
 * Joan Shirley was elected in 1463 and was alive in 1484, when she authorised a lease.
 * Elizabeth Horde or Whorde was elected in 1485 and was active still in 1490–1, when she issued a receipt to John Newport.
 * Alice Wood was elected in 1491 and resigned in 1498.
 * Margaret Cowper, also called Margery, was elected in 1498 and is known to have granted a 70-year lease at Rudge in 1504.
 * Margaret Sandford occurs from 1510, served until the dissolution and was granted a pension in 1538.

title: White Ladies Priory


text: User talk:81.175.83.50

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

title: User talk:81.175.83.50


text:
Johnny Checketts

John Milne Checketts, (20 February 1912 – 21 April 2006) was a New Zealand flying ace of the Second World War, who was credited with the destruction of $14 1/2$ enemy aircraft, three probably destroyed and 11 damaged.

Born in Invercargill, Checketts worked as a mechanic before joining the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF) in October 1940. After completing his flight training he was sent to the United Kingdom to serve with the Royal Air Force. From January 1942, he flew with No. 485 (NZ) Squadron before being posted to No. 611 Squadron. He returned to No. 485 Squadron in August 1943 as its commander but two months later was shot down over occupied France. He was returned to the United Kingdom by the French Resistance. He later commanded a wing carrying out operations in support of the D-Day landings and escorting heavy bombers on raids into Germany.

Checketts remained in the RNZAF after the war, commanding air bases in New Zealand and Fiji. Returning to civilian life in 1954, he set up an aerial topdressing company and later undertook conservation work. He died in 2006, aged 94.

Early life
John Milne Checketts was born in Invercargill on 20 February 1912, the first of three children, to Ernest and Mary Jane Checketts. His father was a carrier, transporting loads around Southland, and he also kept animals. Checketts was educated at the Invercargill South School and then Southland Technical College, where he studied engineering. He graduated in 1928 but continued to study engineering at night school while undertaking an apprenticeship as a motor mechanic.

Finishing his apprenticeship in 1934, Checketts began working for a motor dealership. His father, who had moved the family to a small farm in 1918, had lost his job and Checkett's wages supplemented the family's income. He was interested in aviation; he had seen his first aeroplane, an Avro 504K, when he was eight years old, and was among the crowd that greeted Charles Kingsford Smith when Smith arrived at Invercargill's Myross Bush aerodrome in the Southern Cross. Checketts took his first flight in late 1937 or early 1938, as a passenger in a de Havilland Puss Moth.

In August 1939, Checketts enrolled in the Civil Reserve for the Royal New Zealand Air Force (RNZAF). Wishing to serve as a pilot rather than the RNZAF's preference for a ground mechanic given his technical background, he took evening classes in educational and technical subjects such as algebra, navigation, electricity and Morse code.

Training in New Zealand
In October 1940, with the Second World War well underway, Checketts was called up to the RNZAF. He underwent flight training at No. 1 Elementary Flying Training School, near Dunedin, soloing on 17 December 1940 in a Tiger Moth. Rated a below-average pilot, he nonetheless went on to No. 1 Service Flying Training School at Wigram, near Christchurch, and then progressed to the Advanced Training School, also at Wigram, after passing his wings examination. Checketts completed his flight training in June 1941 and was commissioned as a pilot officer in the RNZAF. He was posted to the United Kingdom to serve with the Royal Air Force (RAF). He departed from Auckland on 22 July 1941 aboard the Dominion Monarch.

Operations
At the RAF's No. 56 Operational Training Unit, in Lincolnshire, Checketts learned to fly the Hawker Hurricane and was assessed as an above-average pilot. Despite his familiarity with the Hurricane, his first operational posting, in November 1941, was to the Supermarine Spitfire-equipped No. 485 (New Zealand) Squadron. Aged 29, he was much older than his fellow fighter pilots. The squadron, with largely New Zealand flying personnel but British ground crew and administration, was based at Kenley, south of London. It shared the facilities with No. 452 (Australia) Squadron and No. 602 Squadron, and these all formed the Kenley Wing. A New Zealander, Al Deere, was commander of No. 602 Squadron and he and Checketts became great friends. At their first encounter, Checketts was depressed; he had struggled on his orientation flight in a Spitfire and was concerned that his squadron commander would transfer him on account of his poor performance. Deere, seeing Checketts on his own, went over and after listening to him, provided reassurance.

Soon becoming familiar with the Spitfire, Checketts began flying missions, his first being on 7 January 1942. On 12 February 1942 the Kenley Wing took part in an operation escorting torpedo-bombers over the English Channel during Operation Cerberus, when the German battleships Scharnhorst and Gneisenau steamed rapidly from Brest in France to reach safety in German ports. Although he did not encounter any German aircraft, Checketts, flying at the rear of his four-man section, used his Spitfire's cannon to help sink an E-boat. The squadron shot down four aircraft and damaged several others, as well as accounting for an E-boat and their exploits received extensive publicity in British and New Zealand newspapers.

In March 1942, having already attacked an E-boat earlier in the flight, Checketts had his first dogfight with German aircraft while escorting Douglas Boston bombers on a mission to Le Havre. Attacked by Messerschmitt Bf 109s, he accidentally set off a series of Very flares while performing evasive moves. This apparently scared off the attacking Bf 109. Further missions across the English Channel followed, and on 4 May 1942, Checketts was set upon by six Bf 109s. He was shot down and bailed out over the channel. He was rescued from his inflatable dinghy by a rescue launch of the Royal Navy. It was only after he was aboard the launch that he realised he had been wounded in the leg by shrapnel. His injuries were minor and he returned to operational duties, carrying out interception and low-level strafing missions, escorting bombers, and undertaking fighter sweeps, within three days of being shot down.

Checketts was promoted to flying officer in June 1942 and was soon posted to "Sailor" Malan's Central Gunnery School at Sutton Bridge, in Lincolnshire. He soon became friendly with Malan, the two going hunting together, and he spent a month improving his aerial marksmanship. Rated "above average" at aerial marksmanship by Malan, Checketts rejoined No. 485 Squadron, which was being rested from frontline duties, on 23 July. Now based at King's Cliffe near Peterborough, the squadron was conducting convoy and night patrols over Norfolk as well as fighter sweeps across to the Low Countries. In mid-August 1942, having accumulated 220 operational flying hours in nine months, and in need of a rest, Checketts was sent to Martlesham Heath to serve as an instructor in fighter gunnery, specialising in deflection shooting. After a few months, he returned to operational duties, this time with No. 611 Squadron. Along with No. 340 Squadron, a Free French squadron, it formed a wing, commanded by Al Deere and based at Biggin Hill as part of No. 11 Fighter Group.

Checketts was soon flying offensive operations with the Spitfire Vb, escorting a bombing raid to Abbeville on 13 January 1943, during which he engaged and damaged a Focke-Wulf Fw 190. This was his first official claim for a damaged fighter; Malan, now station commander at Biggin Hill, had queried Checketts about the operation afterwards and ordered him to make a claim. Although Checketts had damaged others in the previous year he had never put in official claims for them. The Spitfire Vb was outclassed by the Fw 190 and the squadron soon reequipped with the Spitfire IXb. In April 1943, Checketts was given command of the squadron's B Flight. On 30 May 1943 he shot down a Fw 190 while on an escort mission to Caen. This was his first confirmed aerial victory; he had already damaged four Fw 190s earlier in the month. Mid-1943 was spent primarily escorting medium bombers on raids to France, Belgium and the Netherlands, or in offensive operations against German fighters. In June 1943, Checketts was promoted to flight lieutenant and also received an honorary commission as a pilot in the Free French Air Forces. By this time, he was regularly flying alongside No. 341 Squadron, another Free French unit that had replaced No. 340 Squadron. Later in the month, he was able to test fly a captured Fw 190, considering it well matched against his Spitfire except at high altitudes. At the end of the month, he was advised that the squadron was to be withdrawn from the frontline for a rest. Since the start of the year, Checketts had recorded 196 flying hours and completed 100 missions; as it happened, he was to remain at Biggin Hill. On the recommendation of Deere, Checketts was given command of his former unit, No. 485 Squadron, now part of the Biggin Hill Wing, and promoted to squadron leader the following month. Checketts' new command would have had, as a typical fighter squadron, an operational establishment of 16 aircraft. It was to swap their old Spitfire Vbs with No. 611 Squadron's Spitfire IXbs.

Command of No. 485 Squadron
On assuming command of No. 485 Squadron, Checketts changed its tactics, drilling it in the "finger four" formation rather than the weaving formation previously used and which led to avoidable casualties. His new command spent several weeks on bomber escort duties and on 15 July 1943 he shot down a Fw 190 near the Somme Estuary. This was followed several days later by two more Fw 190s, one over Tricqueville and the other on the French coast. He had accounted for two of the four German aircraft shot down by No. 485 Squadron that day. The wing's No. 341 Squadron destroyed a further five aircraft. With neither squadron of the Biggin Hill Wing suffering any casualties, it was recognised for its efforts with congratulatory telegrams from Winston Churchill and Air Marshal Trafford Leigh-Mallory, the head of Fighter Command. On 31 July 1943, Checketts claimed a Bf 109G while on a bomber escort mission to Tricqueville. Guiding the squadron towards Douai as cover for a group of Martin B-26 Marauder bombers on 9 August 1943, Checketts spotted a flight of eight Bf 109s in the distance. With the permission of Deere, also flying as commander of the Biggin Hill wing, Checketts led a breakaway section of four Spitfires to attack them. He quickly destroyed three of the Bf 109s and damaged another while the other pilots in the section destroyed one each. This action received considerable publicity and was the subject of a BBC radio broadcast featuring Checketts. For his exploits he was later awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC); the citation, published on 17 August 1943, read:"This officer has led the squadron and, on occasions the wing, with great skill. He has invariably displayed great keenness to engage the enemy and has destroyed two enemy aircraft and damaged several more. In addition he has destroyed two E-boats and successfully attacked military installations." While acting as high cover for bombers attacking an airfield near Rouen on 22 August, No. 485 Squadron was jumped by a force of Fw 190s and Bf 109s, and several pilots were shot down. Checketts probably destroyed a Bf 109 but as he did not see it go down, he claimed it as damaged. The following day, he shot down a Fw 190. By now he was occasionally leading the Biggin Hill Wing on its raids, one being on 24 August 1943, when it covered a bombing raid on an airfield near Paris.

On 6 September 1943, No. 485 Squadron flew high cover for B-26 Marauders bombing the rail marshalling yards at Serqueux, Seine-Maritime. The Spitfires were attacked by 20 Fw 190s from above. Checketts shot one down but was then attacked by several others and his aircraft was set on fire. Burned and wounded, he struggled to bail out. He landed 10 km from Abbeville in a field where he was approached by a French boy who helped him on to his bicycle and then wheeled him to nearby woods. The next day he was taken by a Frenchman to his own home, where his injuries were tended by the Frenchman's wife.

After several days of recovery, Checketts was passed onto the French Resistance, which shuttled him from house to house until he met with four other downed pilots in hiding, including another from his squadron, Flight Sergeant Terry Kearins, who had been shot down on 15 July. Several days of travel around the north of France ensued as various plans to get the pilots to England were formulated and discarded. During this time, they stayed with the Lavanants, a French farmer and his family. Their daughter, Marie, was active in the resistance. Eventually, they were taken across the English Channel in a fishing boat. Checketts underwent an intensive debriefing to confirm his identity and to eliminate the possibility that he was a German spy before returning to No. 485 Squadron, which was now based at Hornchurch. He requested a return to operational duty but this was denied; he was advised by the commander of No. 11 Group, Air Vice Marshal Hugh Saunders, that he needed a less stressful role. Checketts was posted to the Central Gunnery School as an instructor, ending his tenure as commander of No. 485 Squadron.

From the time he took command until he was shot down, No. 485 Squadron had destroyed more enemy aircraft than any other squadron of No. 11 Fighter Group. In December 1943, he was awarded the Distinguished Service Order (DSO). The citation, published in the London Gazette, read:"In air operations this officer has displayed courage, fortitude and skill of a high order. He has taken part in a very large number and has proved his skill in many combats, having destroyed at least 11 aircraft; he has also caused the destruction of 2 E. boats. By his exceptional keenness and fine fighting spirit, Squadron Leader Checketts has proved a source of inspiration to all."

Return to operations
After six months as an instructor, in April 1944 Checketts was given command of No. 1 Squadron. It was equipped with the Hawker Typhoon fighter-bomber but was to convert to Spitfires. After six weeks, he was promoted to wing commander and appointed to lead Horne Wing, which included three squadrons of Spitfires and was based at Horne in Surrey. From Horne, he led his command as it provided cover for the invasion of Normandy and subsequent operations into Caen. He carried out four sorties on D-Day, logging seven hours and 35 minutes of flight time. During the course of the day, his aircraft was struck by friendly fire from British ships off the landing beaches. Soon after D-Day the Germans started launching V-1 flying bombs and by the middle of the month, he had destroyed two of these. On 27 August 1944, he was leading one squadron as an escort to Avro Lancaster and Handley Page Halifax heavy bombers on their way to attack an oil refinery near Düsseldorf. Messerschmitt Me 163 rocket fighters of Jagdgeschwader 400 were scrambled to intercept the bombers and were engaged by his fighters. Checketts was attacked by an Me 163 but managed to evade it. By September 1944, Checketts' wing was primarily engaged in escorting American heavy bombers on daylight missions to Germany. He was later awarded the Silver Star for this work. His last operation with Horne Wing was on 25 September 1944. While flying as high escort cover over Arnhem, he shared in the destruction of a Bf 109 with one of his flight commanders. The next day, overdue for a rest having flown 115 missions and logging 301 flying hours as wing commander, he was removed from flight duty.

This would prove to be the end of Checketts' operational career in the war. He was credited with destroying 14½ enemy aircraft, along with three probables and 11 damaged. He had also destroyed two V-1 flying bombs. Aviation historians Christopher Shores and Clive Williams consider he had achieved 14 victories, three probables, eight damaged and two V-1s destroyed. He was the eighth most successful New Zealand fighter pilot of the war, based on enemy aircraft destroyed. As well as receiving the DSO, DFC and Silver Star, he was made an honorary member of the Free Polish Air Force, having flown 25 missions with the RAF's No. 303 Polish Squadron, part of the Horne Wing, and awarded the Cross of Valour.

Final months of war service
In October 1944, Checketts was posted to the Central Fighter Establishment at the RAF base at Wittering, near Peterborough. He specialised in the analysis of short-range high altitude fighters, discussing and writing about the tactics of using these types of aircraft. In the course of his duties, he flew several types of aircraft, both Allied and German. He also returned to France to visit the various people who had helped him evade capture there after being shot down. He was distressed to find that at least one had been arrested by the Germans and later died in captivity.

By April 1945, with the war in Europe nearly over, Checketts sought a transfer to the Pacific Theatre of Operations so that he could fly with the RNZAF against the Japanese. This was declined and he instead was sent to the Empire Central Flying School in Wiltshire. This was considered to be a "university of flying", and when he graduated in August 1945 it was with a "Distinguished Pass". The war against Japan had ended and the RNZAF ordered him home for repatriation. He arrived back in New Zealand on 1 October 1945, having travelled there via Canada, the United States and Fiji. His reception at Auckland included a large press contingent.

Postwar career
After the war Checketts, wanting to remain in the RNZAF, was encouraged by the Chief of Air Staff, Air Vice-Marshal Leonard Isitt, to consider a transfer to the RAF. Isitt advised that career prospects in the RNZAF were likely to be limited as it would be downsized considerably from its war footing. Checketts reaffirmed his desire to serve in New Zealand, notwithstanding the comments of Walter Nash, the Minister of Finance, to expect a cut in pay. Nash's comments greatly angered Checketts, who pointed out that the government was quite prepared to pay more when pilots' lives were at risk serving their country in wartime.

On 10 November 1945, in Christchurch, Checketts married Natalie Grover, whom he had first met during training at Wigram in 1940. Several former pilots of No. 485 Squadron attended the ceremony as did the New Zealand High Commissioner from London, on a visit to Christchurch at the time. Checketts' first post-war position with the RNZAF was as administrative officer at Wigram, assisting with the demobilisation of RNZAF personnel. He soon lost his rank of acting wing commander, reverting to squadron leader but this was restored in February 1947. Later that year, he set a new record of three hours and 38 minutes for an aeroplane crossing the Tasman Sea when he delivered a de Havilland Mosquito recently acquired by the RNZAF from the Royal Australian Air Force. In November 1947, with his wing commander rank made substantive, Checketts was appointed commander of the RNZAF Station at Laucala Bay in Fiji. This was followed by a year, beginning in January 1950, at the Royal Air Force Staff College in Bracknell, England. He then held a short posting with British Air Forces of Occupation in Germany before returning to New Zealand in April 1951. Checketts was appointed officer commanding the RNZAF Flying Wing based at Ohakea in May 1951. He was responsible for introducing the de Havilland Vampire to form No. 14 Squadron, the RNZAF's first jet squadron.

Checketts became commander of Taieri Station in December 1952, training flyers for the New Zealand Territorial Air Force. He also served for a time as aide-de-camp to the Governor General, Sir Willoughby Norrie, was involved in the New Zealand leg of the 1953–54 Royal Tour, and was awarded the Queen Elizabeth II Coronation Medal.

At the time of Checketts' command of Taieri Station, the main aircraft used in flight training were the Harvard and the North American P-51 Mustang, the latter of which he considered unsuitable for use by inexperienced territorial pilots. In September 1954, an aircraft practicing night flying from Taieri Station crashed, killing the pilot and his passenger. Unbeknown to Checketts, territorial pilots were not allowed to perform night flying and at the subsequent inquiry, he was held responsible for the accident. Checketts resigned from the RNZAF in protest, considering the outcome unjustified.

Later life
Following his resignation from the RNZAF, Checketts started an aerial topdressing company, going into partnership with Leonard Wright, the mayor of Dunedin, and Jack Manchester, a former captain of the All Blacks. Recognising that aerial topdressing, not widely employed in farming in New Zealand at the time, could be a lucrative business, he purchased a Tiger Moth to form the basis of the business. Although Checketts had intended to focus on bringing in orders, he ended up doing most of the flying for the company when the original pilot crashed the Tiger Moth. In July 1958, having experienced two plane crashes, he sold the business. He became a salesman of agricultural chemicals, working for his former business partner, Wright.

In 1963, Checketts was the successful applicant for the position of secretary-manager for the Otago Acclimatisation Society. In this role, he was involved in the regulation of hunting and fishing as well as conservation work. In 1973, he moved to Christchurch to take up similar work on behalf of the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society. His role required him to liaise with hunting and fishing organisations, which were often in conflict. Worn down by the stresses, he resigned from the society in 1978 and found part-time employment in the leather-working industry. He retired in 1982.

In his later years, Checketts was involved in the development of the Royal New Zealand Air Force Museum at Wigram. He was already an honorary member of the No. 1 Officer's Mess at the RNZAF base at Wigram. In 1990, he was the subject of a "This Is Your Life" television show, which reunited him with Marie Lavenant, who had helped him return to England after he had bailed out over France. Another participant in the show was Deere, his former commander. Checketts died of cancer at his home in Christchurch on 21 April 2006, aged 94. He was survived by two sons and a daughter, his wife having predeceased him by several years. After a service at St. Matthew's Anglican Church, for which the RNZAF provided a guard of honour, a P-51D Mustang performed a flypast.

Legacy
Checketts is remembered by at least two street names in New Zealand towns; Checketts Avenue in Christchurch and Checketts Place in his hometown, Invercargill. The engine from the Spitfire which he bailed out of over France in 1943 was later recovered and is now displayed at the Air Force Museum of New Zealand at Wigram.

title: Johnny Checketts


text: User talk:144.137.152.31

title: User talk:144.137.152.31


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Halo Gurps

Category:Halo Gurps
Category for non notable unfinished book. See also Articles for deletion/Gurps Halo and Articles for deletion/GURPS Halo CambridgeBayWeather 10:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * MOVED TO CFD. BD2412  talk 22:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gurps Halo

Category:Gurps Halo
Category for non notable unfinished book. See also Articles for deletion/Halo Gurps and Articles for deletion/GURPS Halo CambridgeBayWeather 10:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * '''Moved to CfD. BD2412  talk 22:22, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
User:Matroy773/Spoonerism sandbox

test page 1

title: User:Matroy773/Spoonerism sandbox


text:
H. T. Sangliana

H. T. Sangliana (born 1 June 1943) was a member of the 14th Lok Sabha of India. He represented the Bangalore North of Karnataka from the BJP, but lost the election 15th Lok Sabha from Bangalore Central with INC. He was given the post of Vice-Chairperson, National Commission for Minorities, with a status equivalent to the Minister of State in the central government.

He is a native of the Indian state of Mizoram and was formerly a police officer who held the post of Commissioner of Police, Bangalore City. As Deputy Commissioner of Police (Traffic) in Bangalore City, he was notable for his attempts to tackle the issue of illegal parking. He retired from the Indian Police Service after 36 years on 1 July 2003, at which time he was Director General of Police and Inspector General of Prisons.

After retiring, on invitation by (BJP) he ran for the old Bangalore North Lok Sabha constituency for the BJP and defeated 34 other candidates. He was expelled from BJP for voting in favour of civilian nuclear deal with the US for which a no-confidence motion was moved against the UPA in Lok Sabha on 22 July 2008, and then joined the Indian National Congress. He contested the newly formed Bangalore Central constituency for the INC in the 2009 Lok Sabha elections and lost to the BJP candidate, P. C. Mohan, by (59,665) votes.

Sangliana was one of 160 international delegates who joined US president-elect Barack Obama at his breakfast table on 10 February 2008. Three films have been made about Sangliana. He was portrayed as a super-cop in the Kannada movie S. P. Sangliana (1988), starring Shankar Nag and Ambareesh.

title: H. T. Sangliana


text:
Samuel Martin (Secretary to the Treasury)

Samuel Martin (1 September 1714 – 20 November 1788) was an Antiguan-born politician and planter.

Family
He was born on the West Indies island of Antigua, the son of Samuel Martin, the leading plantation owner on the island. He had three notable half-brothers: Sir Henry Martin, 1st Baronet (1733–1794), for many years naval commissioner at Portsmouth and Comptroller of the Navy, and the father of Thomas Byam Martin; Josiah Martin (1737–1786), Governor of North Carolina from 1771 and William Byam Martin, a merchant and official of the East India Company who returned to England as wealthy nabob. His full-sister Henrietta (Rilla) Fitzgerald was the mother of poet William Thomas Fitzgerald and mother-in-law of equity lawyer John Fonblanque KC MP for Camelford 1802–1806. Martin's will seems to reveal the existence of the mother of his natural child or children.

Parliament
Martin sat as Member of Parliament (MP) for the Cornish borough of Camelford from 1747 until 1768. He was a protégé of an important British politician, Henry Bilson Legge, who was three times Chancellor of the Exchequer. When Legge was first made Chancellor, Martin served as his secretary from April 1754 until November 1755.

Martin, although he lacked major political talents and was mistrusted by Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle, had a capacity for hard work and dealing with administration. This led to his being appointed Secretary to the Treasury for the first time in November 1756, during Legge's second Chancellorship. This was a post which was more administrative than political in nature, although Martin was an MP and the appointment was a patronage one. In April 1757, he left office together with his political allies, led by William Pitt the Elder.

When Legge was restored to the Chancellorship for the third time in July 1757, Martin was the only person who had gone out of office in April who was not given a new job in the Pitt-Newcastle Coalition. Having failed to obtain an office in the King's service, Martin was compensated by being appointed Treasurer to the Princess Dowager of Wales Augusta of Saxe-Gotha (mother of the future King George III of the United Kingdom) in October 1757, an office he retained until 8 February 1772. In 1760 King George III succeeded to the throne and Martin was able in the following year to transfer his political loyalty from Legge (who was becoming less prominent in public life) to the King's favourite John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute.

In April 1758, Martin became Secretary to the Treasury for the second time and continued in that office until April 1763. After leaving the Treasury in 1763, Martin largely withdrew from public life. He declined to seek re-election to Parliament in 1768, unless the government paid all his election expenses. Although this proposal was not accepted, he was returned again for Hastings until 1774.

Duel with John Wilkes
The Times of Wednesday 26 November 1788 reported: "Last week died Samuel Martin Esq a gentleman well known in the political world and particularly from his having fought a duel about five and twenty years ago with Mr Wilkes". This pistol duel took place in Hyde Park on 16 November 1763. John Wilkes was severely wounded in the stomach, ultimately fled to Paris and was pronounced an outlaw.


text: User talk:194.210.68.152

title: User talk:194.210.68.152


text:
Talk:Thief knot

Untitled
I think this is the incorrect name for the knot; isn't it the "Thief's Knot"?
 * I've only ever heard it being refered to as a "Thief Knot" Jediwannabe 07:27, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Thief knot is fine Frank van Mierlo 17:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Huh?
I'm not entirely sure how exactly this is different from the square knot. Could someone explain that a bit more clearly? 72.194.193.198 03:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

 * If you don't pay attention to which is the short end and which is the long end, they are the same. Its all in whether the short ends are on the same side of the knot or on opposite sides. It can make a difference. Its the same thing with the granny knot and the grief knot. Get a piece of rope and tie both of these knots and pull on the long ends. Then you'll understand the difference. PAR 14:31, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.61.180.158 (talk) 15:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Does this knot have a practical use (except as a trick)?
I just tried tying this knot, and it slipped very easily when I applied a slight tension to the two lines. It seems to be nearly as bad as the "grief knot". Am I doing something wrong, or is this expected? Perhaps the article should emphasize that this knot is not a functional alternative to the reef/square knot, and is only tied for its deceptive appearance.

Mtford 00:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Alternative backstory
someone told me that it is because in victorian times when wagons were being taken to be sold they would tie them all together with reef knots. Then thieves would untie the reef knot on the back wagon and replace it with a thief knot, which unties under load, hence the name. The thieves would then steal the back wagon as the rest left without it. Is this bs? Have i been lied to? JacobTheRox (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Thief knot


text:
Gunung Leuser National Park

Gunung Leuser National Park is a national park covering 7,927 km2 in northern Sumatra, Indonesia, straddling the border of Aceh and North Sumatra provinces, a fourth portion and three-fourths portion, respectively. The national park, settled in the Barisan mountain range, is named after Mount Leuser (3,119 m), and protects a wide range of ecosystems. An orangutan sanctuary at Bukit Lawang is located within the park. Together with Bukit Barisan Selatan and Kerinci Seblat National Parks, it forms a World Heritage Site, the Tropical Rainforest Heritage of Sumatra.

Geography

Gunung Leuser National Park is 150 km long, over 100 km wide, and mostly mountainous. About 40% of the park, mainly in the north-west, is steep, and over 1,500 m in elevation. This region is billed as the largest wilderness area in Southeast Asia, and offers wonderful trekking. Around 12% of the park, in the lower southern half, is below 600 m above sea level. Eleven peaks are over 2,700 m. Mount Leuser (3,119 m) is the third-highest peak on the Leuser Range. The highest peak is Mount Tanpa Nama (3,466 m), the second-highest peak in Sumatra after Mount Kerinci (3,805 m).

Ecology

Gunung Leuser National Park is one of the two remaining habitats for Sumatran orangutans (Pongo abelii). In 1971, Herman Rijksen established the Ketambe Research Station, a specially designated research area for the orangutan. Other mammals found in the park are the Sumatran elephant, Sumatran tiger, Sumatran rhinoceros, siamang, Sumatran serow, sambar deer and leopard cat.

After researchers put 28 camera traps in July 2011, 6 months later the researchers found one male and six females, and predicted the population is not more than 27 Sumatran rhinos, of which the total population is predicted to be around 200 in Sumatra and Malaysia, half the population of 15 years ago.

Water supply
The first signs of reduced water replenishment have already been seen in and around the Leuser Ecosystem. Groundwater reservoirs are rapidly being exhausted, and several rivers fall completely dry during part of the year. This has severe consequences for the local community. Both households and industries need to anticipate water shortages and higher costs for water.

Fishery
Coastal fisheries and aquaculture in and around Leuser are very important. They provide a large portion of the animal protein in local people’s diets and generate ample foreign exchange. Their annual value currently exceeds US $171 million. If the Leuser Ecosystem is degraded, the decline in fresh water may have a detrimental impact on the functioning of the fishery sector.

Flood and drought prevention
Flooding generally becomes more frequent and more destructive as a result of converting forests to other uses. Annual storm flows from a secondary forest are about threefold higher than from a similarly sized primary forest catchment area.

In Aceh, local farmers have reported an increasing frequency of drought and damaging floods due to degradation of the watercatchment area. In May 1998, over 5,000 hectares of intensive rice growing areas were taken out of active production. This was the result of the failure of 29 irrigation schemes due to a water shortage. Floods in December 2000 cost the lives of at least 190 people and left 660,000 people homeless. This cost the Aceh province almost US $90 million in losses. Logging companies are reportedly slowly recognising their role in increased flooding.

Agriculture and plantations
Agriculture is a major source of income for the local communities around Leuser. Large rubber and oil palm plantations in northern Sumatra play a major role in the national economy.

Almost all remaining lowland forest area has been given out officially for oil palm plantations. Yield decline has been recorded, however, in several Leuser regencies. This decline can be ascribed mainly to a deterioration of nutrients in the soil, along with soil erosion, drought and floods, and an increase in weeds.

Hydroelectricity
Several regencies, such as Aceh Tenggara, have hydroelectric plants that use water from Leuser. The plants operated in Aceh Tenggara are designed as small-scale economic activities. It appears that the operational conditions for the hydroelectric plants have worsened in recent years. Increased erosion of the waterways has forced the operators to remove excessive sediments from their turbines. This has led to frequent interruption of the power supply, higher operational costs, and damage to the blades of the turbines. One plant closed down due to lack of water supply. Most of these disturbances are considered abnormal and may, therefore, be attributed to deforestation.

Tourism
Low-impact ecotourism can be one of the most important sustainable, nonconsumptive uses of Leuser, thereby giving local communities powerful incentives for conservation. Given the opportunities to view wildlife such as orangutans, some experts view ecotourism as a major potential source of revenue for communities living around Leuser.

A 7- to 8-hour drive from Medan, Tangkahan is visited by 4,000 foreign tourists and 40,000 domestic/local tourists a year. Modest inns are available, but generation set electricity is limited. Many Tangkahan people nowadays work for tourism and avoid illegal logging, with education sometimes past the elementary school, but with training, they can serve the tourists well. All tourists should enter Tangkahan Visitor Center first, and choose the various packages, with up to 4 day and 3 night packages, the prices are fixed even for the porters. Trekking can be done by foot or using elephants.
 * Tangkahan trekking

Biodiversity
Gunung Leuser National Park is known to be an area of high biodiversity. There are an estimated 10,000 different plant species, almost 600 bird species, 200 mammal species and close to 100 species of amphibians and reptiles.

Carbon sequestration
Anthropogenic increases in the concentrations of greenhouse gases (such as CO2) in the atmosphere lead to climate change. Carbon sequestration by rainforest ecosystems, therefore, has an economic value, since the carbon fixed in the ecosystem reduces or slows increases in atmospheric concentrations.

Nontimber forest products
Nontimber forest products can provide local communities with cash as long as exploitation does not surpass a threshold level.

Threats
In November 1995, the Langkat Regency government proposed a road to connect an old enclave, known as Sapo Padang, inside the park. In pursuit of business opportunities, 34 families who had been living in the enclave formed a cooperative in March 1996 and subsequently submitted a proposal to develop an oil palm plantation in August 1997. The oil palm proposal was accepted by the regency and the head of the park agreed to the road construction.

In accordance to the government's Poverty Alleviation Program, the oil palm project proceeded with 42.5 km2 of clearance area, but the project caused major forest destruction in the park during its implementation. The local cooperation unit formed a partnership with PT Amal Tani, which has strong relationship with the military command in the area. In January 1998, the Indonesian Forest Ministry granted permission for 11 km road to be built. In June 1998, the local office of the Forestry Service issued a decree stating that the Sapo Padang enclave was no longer legally a part of the national park, a controversial decision, which consequently led to further forest destruction during the road construction and invited newcomers to slash and burn forest area to create local plantations a way deeper to the park. The park during this time was subject to illegal logging.

In 1999, two university-based NGOs filed a legal suit to the Medan State Court, while a group of 61 lawyers brought a parallel case in the National Administrative Court. In July 1999, the National Administrative Court rejected the case, while the local NGOs won with 30 million rupiahs damage, but the legal process continues with appeals. The legal process did not stop the project that extensive logging and clearing, road-building, and oil palm plantation continue operating inside the national park.

Pressures on locals, in a 2011 report, from palm oil profits has led to illegal slashing and burning of 21,000 hectares per year.
 * "Despite being protected by federal law from any form of destructive encroachment, illegal logging is still rampant in the forest, with the foliage of the Leuser ecosystem disappearing at a rate of 21,000 hectares per year."

Relocations
In December 2010, 26 families comprising 84 people were moved from Gunung Leuser National Park area to Musi Banyuasin, South Sumatra. Thousands of people inhabit the park illegally, and the Indonesian government plans to move them. Many of the inhabitants are refugees from the violence and disasters in Aceh.

title: Gunung Leuser National Park


text: Category:National parks of Indonesia

title: Category:National parks of Indonesia


text:
Samuel Martin (politician)

Sir Samuel Martin QC (1801 – 9 January 1883) was an Anglo-Irish politician and judge.

Early life and education
Martin was born in 1801, the son of Samuel Martin of Calmore, County Londonderry. He was educated at Trinity College Dublin, receiving a BA in 1821 and an MA in 1832. He became a student at Gray's Inn in 1821 and practiced as a special pleader. He transferred to the Middle Temple in 1826, and was called to the bar in 1830.

In 1838, he married Frances Homera, the daughter of Sir Frederick Pollock, Lord Chief Baron of the Exchequer. She died on 19 April 1874, aged 56.

Career
Martin was active as a barrister on the Northern Circuit, and gained a reputation for skill. He took silk in 1845. He entered the House of Commons for Pontefract in 1847 as a Liberal, after a closely fought contest. However, he only held the seat until 1850, when he was knighted and appointed a Baron of the Exchequer. He received an LL.D. from Trinity in 1857.

Later life
Martin left the Exchequer bench in 1873, due to deafness, and was appointed a Privy Counsellor on 2 February 1874. He returned to the Middle Temple in 1878. He divided his time between his estate at Myroe, County Londonderry (where he was a justice of the peace and a deputy lieutenant) and his London residence in Piccadilly. He died at the latter in 1883 and is buried in Brompton Cemetery, London.

title: Samuel Martin (politician)


text:
User talk:Praviljithpv

hiii allll

i'm praviljith..frm India i'm 22 years old..doing mi graduation in Comp.Science n Engg. i would like to share my ideas n inviting d thoughts abt anything frm d people all over d world....... du write me...at

praviljithpv@gmail.com

pravil.

title: User talk:Praviljithpv


text:
Talk:Francis de Groot

Untitled
No mention of his plans to kidnap Jack Lang? The article on the bridge includes in his quotation, as he slashes the ribbon, "His Majesty the King". Which is just what one would expect, given his motives. I have no idea what is correct though. 84.135.242.18 13:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

 * According to Brian Wright (op. cit.), he didn't mention the King, because this would be disrespectful, and it was the New Guard (not de Groot personally) who talked about arresting Lang, but did nothing to bring this to fruition. De Groot then decided to act on his own, with the New Guard's blessing.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

King or his rep?
In the Sydney Harbour Bridge article it says

However, in this article it says   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flash man999 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Who opened the bridge?This was changed from the Governor General to the State Governor, however this conflicts with this link Bridge Medal. Does anyone have a better idea of who actually opened the bridge and what were the purported reasons for de Groot's actions. Ozdaren (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

There was a lot of public opposition to Premier Lang's decision to personally open the bridge, rather than allow the Governor to do this. Normally the governor would have officiated. De Groot's actions were a protest against the premier upstaging the governor. Accordingly the wording that he upstaged the premier is rather unfortunate. I would also suggest that the term "notorious" is not needed. De Groot's protest, if not his politics, were popular.JohnC (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Captain or Colonel?
Was de Groot a Captain or Colonel? Most of this page seems to have been lifted from Francis de Groot: Irish Fascist Australian Legend  This is a copyright violation. Ozdaren (talk) 14:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Contesting speedy delete
This was most definitely NOT taken from Willan Publishing. It was created in 2004! I can only assume Willam have copied material from this article. -- JackofOz (talk) 15:19, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Cheers, I thought I'd picked the right person to clarify this. Ozdaren (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Legality
I suspect that anyone upstaging a dignatory and declaring a bridge opened is not acting illegally. There may be some minor legal breaches, but that would be peripheral to the main issue.

However I would question the accuracy and point of the comment that "A large part of the plan to humiliate Lang was for all of de Groot's acts to be legal." What is the basis for that statement? This was a protest against the premier upstaging the governor (and people). How many protestors are overly concerned with the legality of their protests?JohnC (talk) 21:15, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

It was clearly illegal, but de Groot did argue that his actions were legal, largely by arguing that his duty as a military officer to the King overrode any duty to obey the government of Jack Lang, which he viewed as illegitimate and treasonous...--Jack Upland (talk) 07:57, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

I have always been confused as to whether De Groot's actions were legal. I gather that Jack Lang, in one of this books, states that De Groot's offensive behaviour was overturned on appeal. The argument was that offensive behaviour could only have occurred if the unopened bridge was a public place, but if it was a public place that would mean that the road was part of the King's Highway, and any one of His subjects was entitled under common law to remove any obstruction, including ribbons, barring free progress on the King's Highway. It seems clear that De Groot successfully sued for wrongful arrest, which he could not have done if he had been convicted. Does anyone have any further information on this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plerdsus (talk • contribs) 11:11, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Francis de Groot


text:
Talk:Metabotropic glutamate receptor

Error check
There is a statement in Metabotropic glutamate receptor,
 * "Rather than having much direct effect on postsynaptic potential, mGluRs serve to modulate the function of other receptors (Chu and Hablitz, 2000). "

I believe this to be in error. Though I cannot access the full article by Chu and Hablitz, metabotropic receptors do not modify other receptors. They usually modulate cAMP which leads to changes in ion channels - and through this they do change the postsynaptic potential. --RichG 10:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You're right that it's not correct to suggest that they don't have any role in postsynaptic potential, so I'll that part of the sentence out. Their modulatory role, however, is REALLY well supported, including their ability to modify other receptors.  Check it out:
 * Metabotropic glutamate receptors provide intrinsic modulation of the lamprey locomotor network. Brain Research Reviews, Volume 40, Issues 1-3, October 2002, Pages 9-18 Abdeljabbar El Manira, Petronella Kettunen, Dietmar Hess and Patrik Krieger

 * Metabotropic glutamate mGlu5 receptor-mediated modulation of the ventral striopallidal GABA pathway in rats. Interactions with adenosine A2A and dopamine D2 receptors. Neuroscience Letters, Volume 324, Issue 2, 17 May 2002, Pages 154-158 Zaida Díaz-Cabiale, Meritxell Vivó, Alberto Del Arco, William T. O'Connor, Michael K. Harte, Christa E. Müller, Emili Martínez, Patrizia Popoli, Kjell Fuxe and Sergi Ferré

 * Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 mediates the potentiation of N-methyl-D-aspartate responses in medium spiny striatal neurons. Neuroscience, Volume 106, Issue 3, 27 September 2001, Pages 579-587.  A. Pisani, P. Gubellini, P. Bonsi, F. Conquet, B. Picconi, D. Centonze, G. Bernardi and P. Calabresi

 * Activation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 1 inhibits glutamatergic transmission in the substantia nigra pars reticulata. Neuroscience, Volume 105, Issue 4, 22 August 2001, Pages 881-889. M. Wittmann, G. W. Hubert, Y. Smith and P. J. Conn

plus, these quotes from articles I'll have listed in the references:
 * "The mGluRs modulate excitatory synaptic transmission in various regions of the brain (Endoh, 2004)"
 * "Glutamate ... activates both ionotropic and metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluRs). The former is involved in fast synaptic transmission whereas the latter play a modulatory role (Chu and Hablitz, 2000)."
 * "[D]istinct functional roles for group I mGluR subtypes have been demonstrated for medium spiny neurons, either in synaptic plasticity or in the modulation of NMDA receptor activity (Bonsi, 2005)."

 * With this and the fact that I'll take out the "much role in postsynaptic potential" part, would you say it's fair to remove the 'dubious' tag? --Delldot 20:28, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Ok, good work! Apparently mGluR do indeed modulate other receptors. I appreciate the lesson. This is cutting edge stuff. --RichG 01:45, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Broken link?
Does this link work for anyone else? Should we remove it or replace it? Thanks, delldot | talk 21:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Ohashi H., Maruyama T., Higashi-Matsumoto H., Nomoto T, Nishimura S., and Takeuchia Y. A Novel Binding Assay for Metabotropic Glutamate Receptors Using (3H) L-Quisqualic Acid and Recombinant Receptors., Verlag der Zeitschrift für Naturforschung, Tübingen. znaturforsch.com (2002).
 * Oh, never mind, I got to it through the web archive. delldot | talk 22:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions
I read with great interest the “Metabotropic Glutamate Receptor” Page of Wikipedia and would like to make following suggestions:

- It is rather difficult to find book references, as for exemple ref. 36 of the History section. Citation of the original papers would considerably facilitate the task of interested readers. The original papers for ref 36 are below. In view of their contents I would suggest the following: "The first demonstration that glutamate could induce the formation of molecules belonging to a major second messenger system was in 1985, when it was shown that it could stimulate the formation of inositol phosphates.(Sladeczek F, Pin J-P, Récasens M, Bockaert J, Weiss S 1985. Glutamate stimulates inositol phosphate formation in striatal neurons. Nature 317, 717-719). This finding allowed in 1987 to yield an explanation for oscillatory ionic glutamate responses and to provide further evidence for the existence of metabotropic glutamate receptors (Sugiyama H., Ito I, Hirono C 1987. A new glutamate receptor linked to inositol phospholipids metabolism. Nature 325, 531-533). In 1991 the first metabotropic glutamate receptor of the seven transmembrane domain family was cloned (Masu M., Tanabe Y., Tsuchida K., Shigemoto R., Nakanishi S. 1991. Sequence and expression of a metabotropic glutamate receptor. Nature 349, 760-765)."

- The following addition could be an interesting extension to the actual complexity of metabotropic responses: "More recent reports on ionotropic glutamate receptors able to couple to metabotropic transduction systems (Dingledine R, Borges K, Bowie D, Traynelis SF, 1999. The glutamate receptor Ion channels. Pharmacol. Rev. 51, 7-61. Wang Y, Small DL, Stanimirovic DB, Morley P., Durkin JP. 1997 Nature 389, 502-504 and references citing Wang et al. in Nature on-line) suggest that metabotropic responses of glutamate might not be limited to seven transmembrane domain metabotropic glutamate receptors.”

In the Function and structure chapter, I would suggest to modify the paragraph: “Unlike ionotropic receptors, metabotropic receptors are not directly linked to ion channels, but may affect them by activating biochemical cascades. In addition to producing excitatory and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials, mGluRs serve to modulate the function of other receptors (such as NMDA receptors), changing the synapse’s excitability.” “…….producing excitatory and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials……” is surely documented by the cited references, but might be misleading for a non-specialist because the straightforward way for “producing excitatory and inhibitory postsynaptic potentials” is glutamate induced opening of ionotropic receptor channels.

My suggestion would be: "Unlike ionotropic receptors, metabotropic receptors of the seven transmembrane domain family are no ion channels. They activate signalling cascades, leading to biochemical modification of other proteins, as for exemple ion channels. This can lead to changes in the synapses’ excitability by, for exemple, presynaptic inhibition of neurotransmission (Sladeczek F, Momiyama A, Takahashi T 1992. Presynaptic inhibitory action of metabotropic glutamatereceptor agonist on excitatory transmission in visual cortical neurons. Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. B 1993 253, 297-303), or modulation and even induction of postsynaptic responses (2, 5-7)."

The paragraph succeeding the above in the mGluR-page describes GroupI mGluR-responses and would therefore fit better in the corresponding chapter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Defincom (talk • contribs) 16:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC) Defincom (talk) 14:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I think these are all fine suggestions, you should go ahead and implement them! Let me know if there's anything I can do to help.  delldot   ∇.  05:09, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Just a note that as a rule, Wikipedia policy prefers secondary references (such as review papers) to primary references, because they lend themselves less to "original interpretation". But on a technical topic like this, it might not be possible to find secondary references that address all the key issues, so you should go ahead and use primary refs if you feel that you need them. Looie496 (talk) 05:50, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Protein Domain
This page has been marked in the category 'Protein Domains' but other than mentioning that the specific protein the article refers to has at least 7 of them, there appears to be no reason for it to be on the list. I would suggest we remove it from the protein domains category. Ta, Abergabe (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Metabotropic glutamate receptor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070915085831/http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Synaptic/info/glutamate.html to http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/Synaptic/info/glutamate.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:07, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Metabotropic glutamate receptor


text: Category talk:Australian trade unionists


text:
Lakeview, Alberta

Lakeview is a summer village in central Alberta, Canada, located on Wabamun Lake. It is located within Parkland County.

History
Lakeview was established on December 31, 1913 through the severance of lands from the Village of Wabamun.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, the Summer Village of Lakeview had a population of 29 living in 17 of its 35 total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of 30. With a land area of 0.32 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

In the 2016 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, the Summer Village of Lakeview had a population of 30 living in 13 of its 23 total private dwellings, a NaN% change from its 2011 population of 26. With a land area of 0.35 km2, it had a population density of in 2016.

title: Lakeview, Alberta


text:
Talk:Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006

Status of the Bill
I can find no evidence in Google News or in Hansard that the Lords have rejected the Bill, though most spoke against it. Can you cite a source?

Many thanks for your work on this article, BTW - I created it partly because I want to know more about the Bill myself and hoped that others would come along and improve it, as you have! — ciphergoth 10:34, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * No, you are quite right - the bill has not been rejected. I was informed that it had been, but later discovered that my source was in error. It has been put to a "committee of the whole house", meaning that the bill will be studied clause by clause at a later date. This is summarised at the very bottom of the minutes for the session. From this I learn that I should check my sources more carefully! :D Thanks for spotting my mistake. — Giddie 15:18, 15th October 2005 (UTC)

Atkinson
The British really know how to turn a phrase. Listen to the following from Rowan Atkinson, which cuts like a knife:

 * "There was a very good free speech clause in there, which came from the Lords - but now, sadly, it has been neutered with a conditional clause in the middle of it, which starts with the word 'unless'.

 * "So you are not guilty of the offence, you can criticise, ridicule and abuse or insult religion or religious belief or religious practice, unless you intend thereby to stir up religious hatred or were reckless as to whether religious hatred would be stirred up." (source: BBC).

Hilarious! - Ta bu shi da yu 09:05, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Notable Amendments?
The introduction section of the article states: "The Act is notable because two amendments made in the House of Lords failed to be overturned by the Government in the House of Commons."

Why does this make the act notable? Isn't that exactly how the British two house system is meant to work and a frequant occurance for controversial/unpopular acts?

Who would actually expect a House of Lords recommendation to be rejected by the House of Commons unless the bill had universal support (which it obviously did not). Canderra 03:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Generally, the government forces through its Bills in the Commons form; certainly, this has been the case over the past decade or so.
 * James F. (talk) 09:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * To expand on what James F. says, the article perhaps speaks in reverse a little. The Commons voted in favour of the Lords' amendments, and defeated the Government in so doing — the Government's own MPs voted against it in sufficient numbers that they were defeated on a 'flagship' piece of legislation. These two defeats were only the Labour Government's (and, more specifically, Tony Blair's) second (and third) Commons defeats in the entire 9 years they have been in office; the other was on a related Bill in 2005. Additionally, although the article appears not to mention it, the Government lost one of the two Commons divisions by a single vote: Tony Blair's; he voted in the first division and not the second. As you observe, the Lords disagreeing with the Commons is not, at present, an unusual occurence: but the Commons then acquiescing to the Lords' amendment when it is other than what the Government would have is extremely rare (in the last few decades at least). -Splash talk 13:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

history at 17th feb '06
on this page, history at 17th feb says that it got the royal assent. but it is still not clear whether it is an act of the parliament or not. please clear this doubt in the article too. nids 16:13, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have now amended that section.
 * To answer your question, once a bill receives Royal Assent it becomes an Act of Parliament. However, under the terms of this Act, it will not come into force until the publication of a relevant Statutory Instrument. Therefore, at the moment in time I am writing this, the Act has no power in law. Road Wizard 17:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks for ur kind reply. can i further ask u, if u have any idea, when it is likely to come into force. does it have any legar barriers left or is it just the normal wait.

and will it ban the current versions of quran and bible in UK. (i mean i support that. the references in Quran and Bible, especially moses, where they are communal and racist, should be banned. )

can u also tell me that are the fears of satires and comedians real after the enactment of law. what will be the fate of books like Satanic verses. (i feel it is a good book and should not be banned) thanx. and if possible, leave a note on my talk page too, if u reply to these enquiries.

nids 18:31, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Before I try to answer your questions, I should point out that I have only a limited knowledge of this particular Act, so my answer will be more of an opinion than verified fact.
 * First of all, the Act will in no way ban any religious texts. The aim of the act is to reduce intolerance and give a measure of protection to the various religions. Actually banning or forcibly amending either the Bible or the Quran would almost certainly set off a series of riots, which would be a result in direct opposition to the intent of the Act.
 * The banning of books like the Satanic Verses or plays and films like the Life of Brian is less clear. The Act gives some protection to writers and performers in their criticism of religious ideas, yet its whole purpose is to restrict the actions of anyone intending to stir up religious hatred through either publication or performance. Until the law comes into force and a few test cases go through the courts, I think there is no way to determine how judges will interpret the law. Personally, I think that very few authors, playwrights or comedians will ever be prosecuted for inciting religious hatred, but the Act may cause some artists to tone down their work for fear of prosecution.
 * As to when the Act will come into force, that is a decision entirely in the hands of the appropriate Secretary of State (probably the Home Secretary). The only process that needs to be followed now is the publication of the Statutory Instrument that I mentioned above, which is a process that can be completed in a matter of weeks after it is decided to go ahead. The publication of the Instrument could occur at any time, or possibly never (if it is decided that the Act is no longer necessary). Road Wizard 23:43, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

 * thanks for these replies. well i dont think that britain being such a civilized country, would break into riots for anything. and specially if something is done for a good cause. they are just going to tell that there are things that Moses said that are not applicable today. similarly, some of the teachings of Muhammad cannot be followed in a civilized world. (for example, killing for apostasy or amputation of limbs as a punishment). well anyway, i support blair for this act but i know that it may never come into force.
 * nids 10:46, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Language
I note the use of the (albeit unhyphenated) phrase, 'stirring up' in the preamble to the act: the 'inciting' would be a more appropriate substitute for the said-phrase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.217.30 (talk) 08:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

It is believed by some...
keeps adding the following passage. I've moved it here in order to discuss it: {{Quotation|It is believed by some that the legislation was specifically put in place by the government after Nick Griffin Chairman of the British National Party was found not guilty in relations to a speech made in Keighley in 2004. After the trial the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown stated "of course, the courts make their judgements on these things. But if there is something that needs to be done to look at the law then I think we will have to do that."


text:
User:Juve82/Million article Project

This is a list of articles, that Wikipedia should include when reaching the 6 million mark:

Cristal (beer), MIM, Stefan Diös

title: User:Juve82/Million article Project


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blueh

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete Ryan Norton T 20:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Blueh
Protoglogism, only used within a Harry Potter fan group Zeimusu | Talk page 10:34, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. CambridgeBayWeather 10:35, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Quickly... -Parallel or Together? 10:40, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now.  Delete made-up words. —Cryptic (talk) 12:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it here. Let a memory for fiction lovers be kept -RC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.188.40.121 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Made up word created by a fan-fiction writer. Not for Wikipedia. Delete Saberwyn 03:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blueh


text:
Lakeview, Calgary

Lakeview is a residential community in the southwestern quadrant of Calgary, Alberta, Canada.

Nestled between Glenmore Trail Sw and Crowchild Trail SW to 37th Street SW, the western city limits at this point. The Tsuu T'ina Nation Indian reserve borders it to the west.

Residences south of 66th Avenue are part of a smaller development named Lakeview Village, which features larger, more expensive homes. East of Crowchild Trail SW with the Earl Grey Golf Course, Longridge Drive and 50th Ave SW, North Glenmore Park is often mistakenly referred to as Lakeview. The community was built in 1960.

History
The community was founded in 1962, six years after the city of Calgary annexed the land it was built on. The name Lakeview was chosen because of the view of Glenmore Reservoir its location afforded. Many of the original homes were built by Engineered Homes Ltd. of Calgary.

Amenities
The Calgary Rowing Club and Calgary Canoe Club are located in the south of the community, adjacent to the Glenmore Reservoir. Numerous hiking and cycling trails are maintained on the shores of the Reservoir, between the Weaselhead flats and Glenmore Trail.

Demographics
In the City of Calgary's 2012 municipal census, Lakeview had a population of living in  dwellings, a -0.6% increase from its 2011 population of. With a land area of 2.2 km2, it had a population density of in 2012.

Residents in this community had a median household income of $64,535 in 2000, and there were 5.2% low income residents living in the neighbourhood. The neighbourhood is represented in the Calgary City Council by the Ward 11 councillor.

Unusually, residents living east of 30th Street may also have membership with the neighbouring North Glenmore Park Community Association.

Education

The main schools in this community are:
 * Connect Charter School
 * Bishop Pinkham Junior High School
 * Jennie Elliott Elementary School
 * Calgary Girls' School

The closest separate school is St.James Elementary & Junior High School

title: Lakeview, Calgary


text:
User talk:QJ?2

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for joining the coolest online encyclopedia I know of. I hope you stick around. You'll probably find it easiest to start with a tutorial of how the wikipedia works, and you can test stuff for yourself in the sandbox. Check out the simplified ruleset. When you're contributing, you'll probably find the manual of style to be helpful, and you'll also want to remember a couple important guidelines.
 * 1) Write from a neutral point of view
 * 2) Be bold in editing pages
 * 3) Use wikiquette.

Those are probably the most important ones, and you can take a look at some others at the policies and guidelines page. You might also be interested in how to write a great article and possibly adding some images to your articles.

Be sure to get involved in the community – you can contact me on my talk page if you have any questions, and you can check out the village pump, where lots of wikipedians hang out and discuss things. Alternatively you can place   on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. If you're looking for something to do, check out the community portal. And whenever you ask a question or post something on a talk page, be sure to sign your name by typing 4 tildes like ~~~~. Always sign the talk page, never the articles.

Again, welcome! It's great to have you. Happy editing!--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  10:36, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:QJ?2


text:
User talk:SCSI Commando

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  10:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Amazing Race 8
Source on the two dating? Sounds like it was more in jest. --Madchester 06:10, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Request for edit summary
Hi. I am a bot, and I am writing to you with a request. I would like to ask you, if possible, to use edit summaries a bit more often when you contribute. The reason an edit summary is important is because it allows your fellow contributors to understand what you changed; you can think of it as the "Subject:" line in an email. For your information, your current edit summary usage is 2% for major edits and 33% for minor edits. (Based on the last 150 major and 3 minor edits in the article namespace.)

This is just a suggestion, and I hope that I did not appear impolite. You do not need to reply to this message, but if you would like to give me feedback, you can do so at the feedback page. Thank you, and happy edits, Mathbot 08:00, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of fictional places in G.I. Joe
I have nominated List of fictional places in G.I. Joe, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of fictional places in G.I. Joe&. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. B. Wolterding (talk) 12:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Oktober Guard

The article Oktober Guard has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "No indication this toy line related to a fictional military organization (from a game/action product series) passes WP:NFICTION/WP:GNG. Pure WP:PLOT+WP:OR."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Battleforce 2000

The article Battleforce 2000 has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "No indication this toy line related to a fictional military organization (from a game/action product series) passes WP:NFICTION/WP:GNG. Pure WP:PLOT+WP:OR."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:20, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of List of fictional places in G.I. Joe for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of fictional places in G.I. Joe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of fictional places in G.I. Joe& until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TTN (talk) 14:12, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:SCSI Commando


text: User talk:212.219.117.140

title: User talk:212.219.117.140


text:
Abaurregaina/Abaurrea Alta

Abaurregaina / Abaurrea Alta (Abaurregaina is the Basque name, Abaurrea Alta its name in Spanish; both are recognised officially) is a municipality and inhabited locality situated in the province and autonomous community of Navarre (Spanish: Navarra), northern Spain. It is situated some 70 km from the provincial capital, Pamplona. As of 2005 INE figures, the municipality had a population of c. 150 inhabitants.

The municipality has an area of some 20.9 km², and with a median elevation of 1039 m is the highest municipality in Navarre.

title: Abaurregaina/Abaurrea Alta