text:
Putney (disambiguation)

Putney is a district in the London Borough of Wandsworth. It may also refer to:

United Kingdom

 * Putney (UK Parliament constituency), in London
 * Putney Bridge, a bridge over the River Thames at Putney
 * Putney Bridge tube station, north of the bridge in Fulham
 * Putney railway station, a national rail station
 * East Putney tube station, on the District Line

United States

 * Putney, Connecticut, a neighborhood of Stratford, Connecticut
 * Putney, Georgia, an unincorporated community
 * Putney, Kentucky, an unincorporated community
 * Putney, South Dakota, an unincorporated community
 * Putney, Vermont, a New England town
 * Putney (CDP), Vermont, the main village in the town
 * Putney, West Virginia, an unincorporated community
 * The Putney School, a private high school located in Putney, Vermont

Elsewhere

 * Putney, New South Wales, Australia, a suburb of Sydney

People

 * Putney Dandridge (1902–1946), American jazz pianist and singer
 * Ann-Maree Putney, Australian ten-pin bowler
 * J.T. Putney (1928–2001), American race car driver
 * John Putney (born 1944), Iowa politician
 * Lacey E. Putney (1928–2017), Virginia politician
 * Martha Settle Putney (1916–2008), American educator and historian
 * Mary Jo Putney, American romance author, also publishing as M.J. Putney
 * Michael Putney, American political reporter and columnist
 * Michael Putney (bishop) (1946–2014), of the Diocese of Townsville in North Queensland, Australia
 * Raphiael Putney (born 1990), American basketball player for Maccabi Haifa of the Israeli National League
 * Snell Putney (1929–2009), American sociologist, environmentalist and author
 * Trevor Putney (born 1960), English former professional footballer
 * Will Putney, American music producer, mixer and engineer
 * Hugh Jenkins, Baron Jenkins of Putney (1908–2004), British politician, Labour Party member

Film

 * Putney Swope, a 1969 film written and directed by Robert Downey, Sr.

Other

 * EMS VCS 3, an early British synthesizer referred to as "The Putney"

title: Putney (disambiguation)


text:
Project Alpha (hoax)

Project Alpha was an effort by magician James Randi to test the quality of scientific rigor of a well-known test of paranormal phenomena.

In the late 1970s, Randi contacted the newly established McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research ("MacLab") with suggestions on how to conduct tests for paranormal phenomena. At the same time, two teenage boys (Steve Shaw, later known as Banachek, and Mike Edwards) independently contacted the McDonnell Laboratory and volunteered as subjects for such tests from 1979 to 1982. They quickly proved to exhibit a range of paranormal abilities far and away better than the other subjects of the experiment. The lab began leaking reports of the pair's capabilities, which were in fact simple magic tricks.

When rumors of the test subjects' connection to Randi reached Peter Phillips, head of the MacLab, he instituted tighter protocols for the experiments; the two subjects' results declined sharply. In 1983, Randi held a press conference to expose the deception in the wake of Project Alpha, as there were a number of controversies about the ethics of interference in scientific research and the validity of paranormal research as it then existed. It remains a watershed event in the field of parapsychology.

McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research (MacLab)
In the 1970s, James Smith McDonnell, board chairman of McDonnell Douglas and believer in the paranormal, approached Washington University in St. Louis with plans to set up a permanent PSI research facility. Eventually, physicist Peter Phillips, who was also interested in the field, agreed to lead a parapsychology lab at the school. Phillips had degrees in physics from both Cambridge University and Stanford University. In 1979, McDonnell arranged a US$500,000 grant for the establishment and five years operation of the McDonnell Laboratory for Psychical Research, or MacLab for short. Phillips was most interested in spoon bending, also known as "psychokinetic metal bending", or PKMB.

The Project Alpha experiment
In response to the announcement of this venture, James Randi wrote to the lab with a list of 11 pitfalls and his suggestions on how to avoid them. These suggestions included a rigid adherence to the protocol of the test, so that the subjects would not be allowed to change it during the run. In writing about Project Alpha, he cited Uri Geller, who had changed protocols during tests at Stanford Research Institute. Whenever something did not work, Geller simply did something else instead, which the researchers then reported as evidence of a successful experimental result. Other suggestions from Randi included using only one test object at a time, and permanently marking the object or objects used so they could not be switched with similar objects. He also suggested having as few people in the room as possible to avoid distractions. In addition, Randi offered his services to watch the experiments, noting that a conjurer would be an excellent person to look for fakery. According to Michael Thalbourne, Phillips did not take Randi up on the offer because of the magician's reputation of being "a showman rather than an unprejudiced critic" and his perceived hostility towards psychic claimants. However, on April 1, 1982, Randi awarded Phillips a Straight Spoon award for reconsidering his position on loose controls after what Randi called a "less-than-enthusiastic reception" for his presentation at the 1981 Parapsychological Association conference.

While testing applicants, the lab started to focus its energies on two young men, Steve Shaw and Mike Edwards, who were much more successful than other applicants. In fact, the two young men were magicians who had each independently contacted Randi when the opening of the laboratory was announced. They offered to participate as test subjects with Randi's support. Part of Randi's instructions to these men was to tell the truth if ever asked whether they were faking the results. According to Randi, they were never asked this question directly; according to a Washington University spokesman, Fred Volkmann, "Such a confrontation did occur and [Edwards and Shaw] did not own up." Shaw and Edwards recall that they were not asked whether they worked with Randi, but simply told there were rumors to that effect.

Steven Shaw and Michael Edwards
When the establishment of the laboratory was announced, Mike Edwards, 18, and Steven Shaw, 17, now known as Banachek, both magicians, each contacted Randi independently with a plan. They proposed to use their skills to deceive the researchers with tricks during the first stages of the investigations. They were chosen as test subjects and the hoax began.

The project had originally started with spoon bending, so the two quickly developed a way to accomplish this. Contrary to one of the caveats Randi noted in his letter, the test setup included not one, but many and various spoons, labeled with paper on a loop of string instead of any sort of permanent marking. When starting to bend a spoon, the two magicians would complain the labels were in the way and remove them. They would then simply switch the labels when putting them back and wait. The spoons were measured before and after the experiment, and since all sorts of spoons were used, simply switching the labels would produce different measurements, causing the scientist to believe that something paranormal had occurred. In other cases, they would drop one of the spoons in their lap and bend it below the table with one hand, while pretending to bend a spoon in their other hand, distracting the scientists.

Because the studio was set up to allow people in front of the camera to see themselves on monitors, and the videotapes were available to be watched by anyone, the two used the video to critique their own performance. They would deliberately fail on their first attempt at a demonstration and then use the video to find out what was visible to the researchers and what was not. They would then modify their technique so it would not appear on video. Edwards found that one particular camera operator was on guard to capture any attempts at sleight of hand, so he picked the man to assist him in one experiment, and he was replaced by a less competent cameraman. This was also a breach of Randi's caveat of not letting subjects modify anything about the testing protocol; the test run should have been stopped at this point and recorded as a failure.

More experiments
Edwards and Shaw were so successful at spoon bending that several other tests were invented. In one, they were given pictures in sealed envelopes and then asked to try to identify them from a list shown to them later. The two were left alone in a room with the envelopes. Although there was a possibility that they would peek, this was supposed to be controlled by examining the envelopes later. The envelopes were held closed with four staples, which the magicians simply pried open with their fingernails. They looked at the picture and then resealed the envelope by inserting the staples back into the same holes and forcing them closed by pressing them against the table.

In another test, they were asked to influence the burnout point of a common fuse. After they were given a chance to work it with their mind, an increasing amount of current was run through the fuse until it blew. The two proved to have amazing abilities in this test after a few trials, eventually causing the fuses to blow immediately once they got used to it. In fact, they were palming the already blown fuses and then handing them back to the experimenters. They also found that pressing down on one end of the fuse in its holder, or just touching it briefly, caused the instruments to record unusual results that were interpreted by the experimenters as psi effects.

In yet another instance, Shaw and Edwards were asked to move small objects in a sealed transparent globe, normally small bits of paper balanced on an edge. At first, they were unable to get anything to happen, but then noticed that the container was being removed to replace the object within. During one such event, they took the opportunity to roll up a small ball of metal foil and drop it into the circular ring cut into the surface of the table that held the globe. This introduced a small gap under one edge, which they could blow into to make the paper move. Other examples included their ability to make digital clocks stop working properly (Edwards put one into a microwave oven for a few seconds), or make images appear on film just by staring at the camera (Shaw spat on the lens).

The researchers explained the inadequacies in experimental protocols by drawing a clear distinction between two different stages of an investigation: the exploratory, informal experiments and the formal experiments. During the exploratory phase, the researchers were simply trying to determine whether there was a phenomenon that could be worth further investigation. Later tests would have included the use of much more complicated protocols and expensive equipment. In this way, they were also trying to set up a comfortable, relaxed atmosphere that is believed to be conducive to psychic phenomena. It is during this stage that Shaw and Edwards were able to convince the researchers of their psychic abilities.

Revelation and aftermath
Phillips decided to release a research brief at a workshop of the Parapsychological Association Convention in August 1981. According to the researchers' official version, in preparation Phillips also wrote to Randi to ask for a tape of fake metal-bending, which was to be shown alongside the recording of Shaw and Edwards. The researchers were looking for critical input from the parapsychology community and afterward released a revised abstract that reflected the received criticism.

After the Project Alpha announcements in the press, Randi wrote to the lab again and stated that it was entirely possible the two were magicians using common sleight of hand to fool the researchers. He also started to leak stories that the two were his plants. The story had been widely circulated by the time the meeting was held the next month. Upon returning from the meeting, Phillips immediately changed the test protocols; Shaw and Edwards found that they were no longer able to fool the experimenters so easily, and in most cases, unable to fool them at all. During this time the lab started releasing additional reports that seriously toned down the success rate. In their own words, "We did not conclude that they must be frauds, but only that after extensive testing, they were not behaving nearly as psychically as they had led us to expect."

According to Marcello Truzzi, Berthold E. Schwarz was the "chief victim of Project Alpha". Schwarz had written a monograph on Shaw's psychic powers which was withdrawn from publication. Truzzi adds "Dr. Schwarz first became involved with Shaw because Schwarz hoped that Shaw might be able to use PK to help his seriously ill daughter for whom no orthodox medical cure is available." Shaw states that he was unaware of this agenda of Dr. Schwarz.

Project Alpha ends
In 1983, Randi decided to end the project and announced the entire affair in a press conference and to Discover magazine. At the press conference, Randi introduced the two subjects as psychics, and asked how they achieved their results to which Michael Edwards replied, "To be quite honest, we cheat." Reactions to the deception ranged from the extremely favorable to deplorable.

Martin Gardner referred to the hoax as a landmark. To counter accusations of unethical conduct on Randi's part, Gardner cites another similar case, that of the "discovery" of N-rays. Loyd Auerbach, noting the less than forty-eight hour notice given to the laboratory of Randi's press conference and the fact that Phillips was not invited to attend it, questioned whether Randi's motives were those of scientific research or showmanship.

An internal memo of the United States Central Intelligence Agency accused Randi of "gross distortions". The memo was written "in anticipation of ... discussions with representatives of Congress" regarding CIA research into paranormal abilities, which was contracted to SRI International, and said "This recent adverse publicity to the field of parapsychology should not have any adverse impact on the GRILL FLAME Project".

James S. McDonnell, who had provided the money to open the MacLab in 1979, died in on August 22, 1980. In 1985, with no funding forthcoming, the MacLab closed its doors.

Randi viewed Project Alpha as "a great success" that "has resulted in some parapsychologists being more careful about their conclusions".

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

title: Project Alpha (hoax)


text:
User talk:Straczynski

Thanks for the tips, Dori! And, Secretlondon, I was already preparing to write my PCB article after I finished the PCdoB one... But I only had some time today. As you can see, my text is online now. I'll try to make the other Brazilian parties later. =) - Straczynski 00:05, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks - you're a complete star! Secretlondon 00:06, Dec 22, 2003 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them:

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Tip: you can sign your name with ~

Dori | Talk 20:46, Nov 29, 2003 (UTC)

Hi. I've done a page for the Brazilian Communist Party if you want to add/amend/correct. Thanks! Secretlondon 23:59, Dec 21, 2003 (UTC)

Brazilian Expeditionary Force
Straczynski,

All the articles that I have ever read about Brazil participation on the Second World War says that Brazil participated in the Monte Castelo campaing and NOT Monte Cassino. Brazilian history books, enciclopedias, newspapers archives (amongst others). Also witnesses (my grandfather -- who was a military), have also also confirmed to me that it was Monte Castelo. The "Capitao de Mar e Guerra" Walter Mesiano (a cousin of mine) -- have also confirmed that it was Monte Castelo and NOT Monte Cassino.

Do a search on google for Brazil and Monte Castelo and you will also find that it was Monte Castelo and not Monte Cassino.

List of political parties in Brazil
You rewrote the list of political parties in Brazil. Did you add any political party in this rewriting? Gangulf 22:29, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Usercategorization
You were listed on the Wikipedians/Brazil page as living in or being associated with Brazil. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Brazil for instructions. Rmky87 06:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

List of Brazilian Jews
Would you mind looking at the recent history of this list and making a comment.--Brownlee 12:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Future Integrated Soldier Technology
Hi, I corrected a double redirect on your user page after moving "Future Infantry Soldier Technology" to the above page. MartinMcCann 15:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Green Party (Brazil)

The article Green Party (Brazil) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
 * Relies on two sources, one of which is questionable.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles 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 article 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. Me-123567-Me (talk) 20:53, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Straczynski


text:
Moline

Moline may refer to:

Places in the United States

 * Moline, Illinois, the largest city of that name in the United States
 * East Moline, Illinois, a city
 * Moline Township, Rock Island County, Illinois
 * Moline, Kansas
 * Moline, Michigan, an unincorporated community
 * Moline, Ohio, an unincorporated community

People

 * Charles Moline (1863–1927), Anglo-Austrian businessman and cricketer
 * Edgar Moline (1855–1943), Anglo-Austrian cricketer
 * Georganne Moline (born 1990), American hurdler
 * Jack Moline (born 1952), American Conservative rabbi
 * Matt Moline, ex-husband of Kathy Griffin
 * Pierre-Louis Moline (c. 1740–1820), French dramatist, poet and librettist
 * Robert Moline (1889-1979), Australian Anglican bishop and Archbishop of Perth

Other uses

 * Moline Automobile Company (1904–1919), American automobile manufacturer in Moline, Illinois
 * Moline Plow Company, a former American manufacturer of plows and other farm implements based in Moline, Illinois
 * Moline High School, Moline, Illinois
 * Moline station, a proposed train station in Moline, Illinois
 * Moline Plowboys, a primary name of the minor league baseball teams based in Moline, Illinois
 * Moline Universal Tractors, an independent American football team that played in 1920
 * Cross moline of heraldry
 * Ulmus americana 'Moline', a cultivar of the American Elm

title: Moline


text:
Tamachi Station (Tokyo)

Tamachi Station (田町駅) is a railway station in the Tamachi neighborhood of Minato, Tokyo, Japan, operated by the East Japan Railway Company (JR East). It is served by the circular Yamanote Line and the Keihin-Tōhoku Line. All trains stop at this station.

Mita Station on the Asakusa and Mita subway lines is within walking distance, although there is no physical connection and the stations are generally not marked as an interchange on route maps. Tamachi is the nearest JR station to Keio University's Mita campus and Temple University Japan's Mita and Azabu campuses.

Station layout
The station consists of two island platforms providing cross-platform interchange in the direction of travel between the Yamanote Line (platforms 2 and 3) and the Keihin-Tōhoku Line (platforms 1 and 4). As this is the first cross-platform interchange following the intersection of both lines the platforms are comparatively busy.

Chest-high platform edge doors were installed on the Yamanote Line platforms in February 2013, entering operation in March.

History
The Tokaido Main Line opened in 1872 and passed through Tamachi, which was at the time still submerged under Tokyo Bay. The area to the west of the Tokaido Line was filled in by the end of the 19th century, and the east side filled in during the early 1900s. Tamachi Station opened on December 16, 1909 as an intermediate station on the newly opened Shinagawa-Karasumori section of the Yamanote Line, then operated by Japanese National Railways. It was the sixteenth stop to open on the Yamanote Line.

The area surrounding the station was predominantly industrial until the 1970s, with several confectionery, electronics and machinery factories. New development shifted to commercial buildings beginning with the Morinaga Plaza Building in 1970. The west side of Tamachi underwent a major redevelopment from 1988, resulting in the current elevated deck and pedestrian bridge over the adjacent Dai-Ichi Keihin road.

Passenger statistics
In fiscal 2013, the JR East station was used by an average of 144,433 passengers daily (boarding passengers only), making it the seventeenth-busiest station operated by JR East.

The passenger figures for previous years are as shown below.

title: Tamachi Station (Tokyo)


text:
Royal Courts of Justice

The Royal Courts of Justice, commonly called the Law Courts, is a court building in Westminster which houses the High Court and Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The High Court also sits on circuit and in other major cities. Designed by George Edmund Street, who died before it was completed, it is a large grey stone edifice in the Victorian Gothic Revival style built in the 1870s and opened by Queen Victoria in 1882. It is one of the largest courts in Europe. It is a Grade I listed building.

It is located on Strand within the City of Westminster, near the boundary with the City of London (Temple Bar). It is surrounded by the four Inns of Court, St Clement Danes church, The Australian High Commission, King's College London and the London School of Economics. The nearest London Underground stations are Chancery Lane and Temple. The Central Criminal Court, widely known as the Old Bailey after its street, is about 1/2 mi to the east—a Crown Court centre with no direct connection with the Royal Courts of Justice.

History
For centuries these courts were located in Westminster Hall; however, in the 19th century, justices decided the courts needed a purpose-built structure. Much of the preparatory legal work was completed by Edwin Wilkins Field including promotion of the Courts of Justice Building Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 48) and the Courts of Justice Concentration (Site) Act 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 49). A statue of Field stands in the building. Parliament paid £1,453,000 for the 6 acre site upon which 450 houses had to be demolished.

The search for a design for the Law Courts was by way of a competition, a then-common approach to selecting a design and an architect. The competition ran from 1866 to 1867 and the twelve architects competing for the contract each submitted designs for the site. In 1868 it was finally decided that George Edmund Street was the winner. Building was started in 1873 by Messrs Bull & Sons of Southampton. Its masons led a serious strike at an early stage which threatened to extend to the other trades and caused a temporary stoppage of the works. In consequence, foreign workmen were brought in – mostly Germans. This aroused bitter hostility on the part of the men on strike, and the newcomers had to be housed and fed within the building. However, these disputes were eventually settled and the building took eight years to complete; it was officially opened by Queen Victoria on 4 December 1882.

Street died before the building was opened, overcome by the work. The building was paid for by cash accumulated in court from the estates of the intestate to the sum of £700,000. Oak work and fittings in the court cost a further £70,000 and with decoration and furnishing the total cost for the building came to under £1 million.

The building was extended to the designs of Sir Henry Tanner to create the West Green building completed in 1912. The Queen's Building followed in 1968 and the Thomas More Courts were completed in January 1990.

The building was used as a "Nightingale Court" for criminal trials during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2021.

Architecture
The design involves a symmetrical main frontage of facing The Strand; the central section, which is stepped back, features an arched doorway leading to the Great Hall; it has a five-part window in a carved surround on the first floor and a gable containing a rose window above. At the top of the gable is a sculpture of Jesus with a flèche behind. There are also statues of Moses, Solomon and Alfred the Great, the four statues symbolising the pillars of English legal tradition. There are towers containing lancet windows on either side of the central section with side wings beyond. At the eastern end of the Strand frontage is a tall clock tower topped by a pyramidal roof, finial and flagpole; it contains a clock and five bells (weighing a total of 8¼ tons) by Gillett, Bland & Co..

Internally, courts are arranged off the Great Hall which runs north–south; there is a courtyard to the east with offices for courtroom staff arranged round the courtyard. The Great Hall contains a bust of Queen Victoria by the sculptor, Alfred Gilbert.

Architectural historian Nikolaus Pevsner has described the building as "an object lesson in free composition, with none of the symmetry of the classics, yet not undisciplined where symmetry is abandoned". David Brownlee has claimed that it was influenced by the reformist political movement and the High Victorian architectural movement and has described it as a "regular mongrel affair" while Turnor described it as the "last great secular building of the Gothic Revival".

The Government Art Collection contains a painting by Henry Tanworth Wells depicting Queen Victoria opening the building in 1882.

title: Royal Courts of Justice


text:
James and Browne

James & Browne was a British automobile manufacturer, based in Hammersmith, London between 1898 and 1910. The enterprise started in 1896 as a partnership between John Melville James, a former racing cyclist, and Tom Bousquet Browne. This partnership was dissolved in 1898 with Browne continuing the business with Francis Leigh Martineau under the James and Browne name.

The James & Browne factory was located at the Chiswick end of King's Street in West London, and there was a car showroom on Oxford Street.

The early cars had an unusual engine layout with the flywheel between the cylinders. The engines were mid-mounted in the chassis, and the cylinders were horizontal. Drive was to the rear wheels via a 4-speed gearbox and chain. The gearbox is in 2 parts, linked by a connecting rod, the left one containing 2nd and 4th gear, and the right 1st, 3rd and reverse.

The 2-cylinder engine is rated at 9 HP, and is just over 2.5 liters in size. A total-loss oiling system is used on the car, lubricating 6 main oil-ways. James & Browne also launched a 4-cylinder version (16 HP), of a similar design to the horizontal 2-cylinder engine.

In 1906 a vertical-engined car was introduced known as the Vertex and available as either a 20 hp four or 30/40 hp six-cylinder.

Surviving cars
Only two of their cars are known to have survived, one built in 1902 and the other in 1904. T.B. Browne, one of the company's founders, remained interested in the condition of the two surviving cars throughout his life and still regularly met with the owners until the early 1960s.

1902 model
The car was built in 1902 and transported by train from the James and Browne works in Hammersmith, London to Albrighton Station, Shropshire. The first owner was Mr. Norman McLean of The Blue House, Tong, Shropshire. Mr. McLean had the car painted in the colours of his stables which were yellow with black lining. The car was then moved to Tong Castle, the home of his fiancée, Miss Hartley. The Hartley family had leased Tong Castle from Lord Bradford since 1855. Miss Hartley’s brother was John Hartley (tennis), the winner of the Wimbledon Gentlemen’s Singles Championship in 1879 and 1880.

Mr. McLean decided that some alterations to the car were required and instructed Mr. Ernest Roy Spencer to carry out the work. The Spencers were blacksmiths and ran their business at 15 Broadway, Shifnal, around three miles from Tong Castle.

In 1910 Mr. McLean decided to sell the car to Ernest Spencer for a nominal sum of £20, and the car was then moved to 15 Broadway, Shifnal. Ernest Spencer decided that Mr. McLean’s colour scheme was too conspicuous for general use and drinking trips, so decided to paint the car battleship grey with black piping. Mr. Spencer intended to convert the car to a pick-up truck for his business and fitted it with magneto ignition and a windscreen. However, with the outbreak of World War I in Summer 1914, the car was mothballed and stored in a shed at the back of the premises and stayed there until 1929.

In 1929 it was decided to enter the car in the Old Crock's Run to Brighton. The less permanent alterations to the car were removed and it was returned to as near original condition as possible. The car took part in the Brighton run on Sunday 20 October (entry number 25) and departed from the Mall at around 9am. The car had a good run but lost time when the battery terminals shook loose, and was the fifth car to arrive in Brighton.

In December 1929, ownership of the car passed to Mr. Herbert Ford who purchased the car from the Spencers for the sum of £35. Mr. Ford was a local man and shrewd businessman, and had owned nearby Lilleshall Hall since 1927. In 1930, Mr. Ford opened some pleasure gardens for the public at Lilleshall Hall, and these included an amusement park, narrow gauge railway and children's playgrounds. The car was used as an attraction in the amusement park. Mr. Ford and his friend, Mr. T.R. Price, entered the car in the 1933 Brighton Run on Sunday 12 November 1933. The car (entry number 21) completed the run successfully with an average speed of 19.61 mph.

In October 1934 the car was purchased by John Garland, Dick and Edward Riddle, three students at the City and Guilds College, part of Imperial College London. The car has been an active part of college life from 1934 to the present day. The car is still maintained by students and driven in many events including the London to Brighton Veteran Car Run.

1904 model
The first owner of the 1904 car was the Rev Dr John Darlington, the vicar of St Mark's Church, Kennington in London, who also owned a house in Curry Rivel, near Taunton in Somerset. The Vicar had originally owned a Peugeot which had badly let him down in 1905, and as a friend of his had a reliable two-cylinder James & Browne car he visited the Showroom in Oxford Street and asked to buy a car "like the one my friend owns". Browne remembered this visit as he had to advise Darlington that the Company had ceased making two-cylinder models in 1904, but he could offer Darlington a new four-cylinder 1905 model. Darlington was adamant that he wanted a two-cylinder car, so it was arranged that an unused two-cylinder engine, gearbox and transmission from the workshop be fitted into a compatible spare chassis, but with a later model body designed for the four-cylinder car.

Ernest Proctor, who was employed at the Westcroft Works, was given the job of assembling this hybrid car, which comprised a very early two-cylinder engine - number 30 - of 1901 or 1902 vintage, a 1904 chassis - number 126, and a body destined for four-cylinder car number 156.

Technical data:
 * Engine: No.30. Twin-cylinder horizontal, each cylinder 4" dia. x 6" stroke. Inlet valves suction operated: exhaust valves mechanically operated. Water-cooled, with no pump or cooling fan.
 * Ignition: 6 volt battery producing ignition via 2 trembler coils (originally also fitted with magneto with switching between trembler and magneto as required). Conventional spark plugs.
 * Lubrication: Drip feed from reservoir on dashboard via sight glasses to 6 oiling points on main bearings and pistons.
 * Gearboxes: Two boxes - one for 1st. 3rd. and reverse, the other for 2nd. and 4th. with a sliding shaft between the two. Lubrication by splash feed in each box.
 * Transmission: Main drive from engine to gear boxes via heavy steel spur gear into a mating 'Buffoline' rawhide gear attached to the flywheel on the crank shaft.
 * Final Drive: By two chains via a differential.
 * Brakes: Foot brake operates on transmission. Hand brake is a conventional drum brake on the rear wheels only.
 * Wheels/tires: Originally wooden wheels with solid tires, but these were changed in the early years to Sankey type metal wheels and fitted with balloon tires.
 * Lighting: Side and rear lamps - oil (paraffin). Headlamps acetylene - gas produced from carbide/water accumulator.

The car was first registered Y184 and was delivered to Darlington at Kennington Vicarage on 10 March 1906. It was used in London until it was driven to Curry Rivel on 23 April 1906 by Henry Lucas, a James & Browne salesman, who remained with the owner for some time after delivery, to teach him how to drive and maintain the vehicle.

The car was driven by Darlington, accompanied by his eldest son John, in 1913/1914, on a 2,000 mile tour of Europe. At the outbreak of World War I, the car was taken back to Kennington where it remained until about 1925, when John Darlington Jr. "got it going again", and drove it back to Curry Rivel. By this time Dr. Darlington had purchased an Armstrong, so the James & Browne was stored in a barn. When the James & Browne Company ceased trading, Henry Lucas (the salesman and chauffeur) with his colleague and friend Ernest Proctor were both made redundant. Lucas, with a partner John Drake, started a motor business in Egham, Surrey called the Egham Motor Company, and in 1914 asked Proctor to join them as Works Manager.

While on holiday in Somerset in 1938, Lucas called at the house in Curry Rivel to see what had happened to the Darlington family; Dr. Darlington was still there and so was the James & Browne car..... in the barn. Dr. Darlington gave the car to Lucas who brought it back to Egham where he and Proctor restored it. It was then kept in the showroom of The Egham Motor Company for many years.

However, when applying to register the car after its restoration, it was discovered that Dr. Darlington had transferred the original registration number, Y184, to his Armstrong, which was (and we believe, still is) on the road! Somerset County Council allocated the nearest unused number to the James & Browne ...Y182 - hence the temporary 2 was fixed over the 4 on the original number plates.

After World War II the car was officially dated by the Veteran Car Club as a 1904 model, and Lucas and Proctor entered it in the London to Brighton Run in November 1948 - the first London to Brighton run for the car. Henry Lucas was driving and Ernest Proctor was passenger.

Proctor's eldest son, Sidney, joined his father and Henry on many of the early runs, until Ernest died in 1958. By 1963, Lucas had become too infirm to continue to look after the car and, as he had no children, he sold the car to Sidney Proctor. On Sidney’s death the car passed to his son. The car was in the Proctor family until it was auctioned in November 2007.

Stand 81, SMM&T 5th International Motor Exhibition February 1906
James & Browne's display from the official catalogue:
 * 16-HP 4-cylinder J & B chassis: 4 speeds, 1 reverse, fitted with patent motor starter. Price £235 with tyres
 * 16-HP 4-cylinder J & B double landaulette to seat four inside and two out. Price £385
 * 30-HP 6-cylinder Vertex standard phaeton to seat five persons. Price £450
 * 45-HP 6-cylinder Vertex saloon to seat seven persons. Price £775
 * 45-HP 6-cylinder motor only on stand including set of parts manufactured by James & Browne Limited

title: James and Browne


text:
La Baule-Escoublac

La Baule-Escoublac (Gallo: Écoubiâ, Ar Baol-Skoubleg, ), commonly referred to as La Baule, is a commune in the Loire-Atlantique department, Pays de la Loire, western France.

A century-old seaside resort in southern Brittany with villas, casino, luxury hotels and an original mix of old Breton and seaside culture with a 9 kilometre long sand beach, La Baule has long been home to French high society's seaside residences. During July and August each year, the population of La Baule increases dramatically with many Parisians staying for weeks and regular day-trippers from Nantes. Parisians can take the train in Paris Montparnasse Station and it is about 3 hours to go to La Baule. Despite this, La Baule is still virtually unknown outside France.

History
In 1779, a violent storm buried the village of Escoublac, near the current location of La Baule, under sand. Escoublac was rebuilt further inland. At that time, the very unstable dunes were occupied only by customs officers, who gave them the name of Bôle, a term indicating an easily flooded maritime meadow.

Birth of a seaside resort
It was only in 1879, when the Saint-Nazaire-Croisic railroad was conceived by Parisian industrialist Jules-Joseph Hennecart that the tourist potential of the coast was recognised.

Just before the inauguration of the line, Hennecart bought 40 ha of dunes for the Society of Escoublac Dunes (Société des dunes d'Escoublac) and commissioned local architect Georges Lafont to design the new town. Lafont designed a long sand promenade named Avenue de la Gare (today Avenue du Général-de-Gaulle) and a chapel (see picture). After the railroad opened Lafont built more than 250 villas, taking the lead in the development of the seaside resort.

Rise of a seaside resort
In 1918, casino business magnate François André (see Groupe Lucien Barrière) set up the redesigning of the La Baule resort based on the Deauville model by combining casinos, luxury hotels and sports facilities all on one site.

In the 1920s, Parisian businessman Louis Lajarrige designed the Bois d'Amour district at La Baule-les-Pins and formed an agreement with the railroad company to move the rails away from the seaside to ensure a direct access to the beach. On 27 July 1927 the new stations of La Baule-les-Pins and La Baule-Escoublac were inaugurated while the old station was torn down to create a flower garden square. By that time, La Baule had become a fashionable seaside resort.

Poche de Saint-Nazaire
During World War II, La Baule formed part of the protective stretch of coast leading to the nearby harbour city of Saint-Nazaire, home of one of the biggest U-boat stations that the Germans built. It not only serviced the German submarine fleet, but was also the only dry dock on the Atlantic capable of housing the German battleship Tirpitz, one of two Bismarck-class ships built for the German Kriegsmarine during World War II.

La Baule and the surrounding areas were heavily occupied by the Germans throughout World War II. During the occupation, a large number of Jewish residents and resistance members were deported to the concentration camps; in La Baule itself 32 Jewish men, women and children - the youngest of whom was 3 years old - were deported (with the assistance of the local French police) to Auschwitz where they all perished.

In 2011, a small group of local residents formed a group to create a permanent memorial, in the form of Stolperstein, to the 32 Jewish deportees since, although there was a memorial in La Baule to 40 named war victims, there was no mention there or on any other memorial of the 32 Jewish deportees. The Mayor refused to allow a request for the Stolpersteines to be installed, claiming that to do so might infringe the French constitutional principles of secularism ("laïcité") and freedom of opinion ("liberté d'opinion") and that the Mairie would therefore need to consult the Conseil d'État, France's constitutional court. In fact, Stolpersteines contain no reference to the religion of the victim who is commemorated and 'freedom of opinion/expression' has never been invoked in either French or European jurisprudence to justify the refusal to commemorate individual victims of war crimes. The Mayor of La Baule has consistently refused to elaborate on his reasoning, and there is no record of the Municipal Council of La Baule having sought a declaration from the Conseil d'Etat in respect of these objections.

Such was the importance attached to the area by the Germans that their troops kept fighting in La Baule and Saint-Nazaire for nine months longer than in the rest of the department, eventually surrendering on 11 May 1945 (3 days after the German unconditional surrender), making this one of the last liberated parts of France. This episode is called Poche de Saint-Nazaire from the French expression poche de resistance.

Tourism
One of France's most exclusive seaside resorts during the first half of the 20th century, La Baule has become much more democratized since the 1960s. Today the resort mixes wealthy family villas, luxury hotels and seaside apartment buildings. The nearby region has long been an area of contact and conflict between Breton culture and that of the neighbouring Loire Valley, and consequently is rich with historic places, castles (Nantes castle), walled cities (Guerande), not to mention 19th century seaside resorts, such as Quiberon, and many typical Breton fishing villages (Le Croisic, Pornichet).

Grand Prix de la Baule (automobiles)
The Grand Prix de la Baule was a Grand Prix motor racing event held there during the 1930s.

Grand Prix de la Baule (equestrian)
Today, the Grand Prix de la Ville de La Baule is an equestrian jumping competition part of the international Equestrian Nations Cup series.

Tourism
Local tourist authorities routinely refer to the bay as "the most beautiful in Europe". La Baule is part of the Côte d'Amour.

The commune of Escoublac has achieved a new vitality with the restoration of its civic center and the installation of many attractions.

The Musée Aéronautique Presqu'île Côte d'Amour (MAPICA), located at the airport, maintains a collection of restored historical French aircraft in flying condition.

Personalities linked to the commune

 * Lluís Companys i Jover (1882-1940)
 * William Grover-Williams (1903-1945)
 * Henri Anger (1907–1989), novelist
 * Gérard Lecointe (1912-2009)
 * Olivier Guichard (1920–2004)
 * Lucien Barrière (1923-1991)
 * Édouard Luntz
 * Dominique Desseigne (1944)
 * Marc Pajot, (1953)
 * Bruno Peyron, (1955)
 * Lolo Ferrari (1963-2000)
 * Charlotte Di Calypso

International relations
La Baule-Escoublac is twinned with:
 * 🇵🇱 Nowy Sącz in Poland
 * Inverness, Scotland
 * 🇩🇪 Homburg, Saarland, Germany, since 1984
 * Corfu, Greece

title: La Baule-Escoublac


text:
Talk:Green party/Archive-01

Archived at 2003-11-29 by till we *)

We've only been through this 20 times.

This is now WRONG. The Marijuana Party or LNSGP is just as "Organized" as (the Global) Green Parties (plural).

The term "green" is *generic* no matter how much "Greens" want it not to be - the name is in common and widespread use generically, and there was a good example of that in Green Party.

restore the names please. I see no meaningful distinction between a "party" and a "Party", other than formal registration which is hopelessly tied to national political customs.

There is however a drastic difference between the many criteria and "(the Global) Green Parties" which already cooperate in a global community.

They do not, much as they might like to claim, have any monopoly on what constitutes an "Organized Green/green party".

The agreement between "(the Global) Green Parties" is an entirely bottom-up consensual agreement between themselves that cannot be forced on anyone else who calls themselves "green" or even "Green". That is critically important to the philosophy of "(the Global) Green Parties" and the terminology now in use confuses that distinction beyond sanity.

Please, understand the material, before you change the names of things:

NO ONE says that "(the Global) Green Parties" have or maintain any control of the term "green party" or "Green Party" - they are simply one of many groups attempting to control the public's mind-share re: what it means to organize such a party.

For instance, opponents of "(the Global) Green Parties" often try to characterize them as single-issue advocates, as top-down imposers of a particular value system, or (as you are doing) seeking to control the iconic use of a very common word.

The purpose of wikipedia is to make this distinction clear but NOT to take sides. The name "Organized Green Party" clearly takes a side... whether it has capitals in it or not.

I repeat, again for the record, that wikipedia *MUST NOT ADD SPURIOUS CAPITALS* in the user interface, and that we will keep having these arguments until it is fixed.

I'm tired of this. All of this was discussed in the talk, several times, and people who don't read it, and who also don't understand the material, keep changing the names.

 * Maybe part of the problem is that you keep writing pages and pages of material that make little sense. You keep saying "(the Global) Green Parties". Is that a fixed term in common use, or did you just make that up? In any event, what exactly does this term refer to? AxelBoldt

 * Please don't accuse people of not reading the talk pages. Honest people can disagree.

 * If most people don't understand the material, then it's important to word it so somebody not steeped in green v. Green debates can understand. One way of making the distinction is to simply say that there are many parties who call themselves green/Green, some of whom give a particular meaning to "Green" embodied in the four pillars/ten key values.  Others use other meanings.  Then there is "no monopoly" on "green", "Green", "Organized", "Global" or anything.

 * Also, these talk pages are not the place to discuss capitalization anymore, especially not by shouting. It's listed on bug reports, you can discuss the merits there.  We've lived with many different capitalization/namespace/subpage schemes here and learned to live with them or change the software.  Be creative, be bold.  Find new, exciting ways to get around the challenges posed.  But please don't shout.  It's loud enough in here already. DanKeshet

 * I repeat, again for the record, that wikipedia *MUST NOT ADD SPURIOUS CAPITALS* in the user interface, and that we will keep having these arguments until it is fixed.

(1) This is not ever going to be fixed, because it's not a bug. Get over it, and work with the medium like a resonsible writer. Wikipedia titles begin with uppercase. Always have, always will, period, end of story, forever and ever, amen.

(2) There is, without question, a single global organization that the mass media of most countries thinks of as "the green party", and that organization (loose as it may be) deserves to be covered in its own right. Pick a name for it--I called it "Organized Green Party", but maybe that's not a good name. OK, call it "Global Green Party" or "Consensus Green Party" or something, but give it a name, let it have its own article, and make the other parties links on the generic green party page.

--Lee Daniel Crocker

1. Sorry, Lee Daniel Crocker, but it is technically possible to get in and hack up the source code to fix the bug. At some point in human history the revolutionary pressure to do this will come to some breaking point, and that is obviously exactly what Karl Marx meant in his manifesto. ;-) Spurious wikipedia capitalization confusing proper and generic nouns enraged the proletariat to reclaim the source code, then their language, then the world.  <-- what future history will say.

 * As I argued elsewhere but will repeat here, even if--and I don't necessarily grant that this is the case, but I'll grant it for the sake of argument--even if this change in the software would be better for this article, that doesn't make a valid argument for changing the software to better suit the purpose of Wikipedia as a whole, which is far more important. Personally, I argued that the fact that the software uses the same string of letters for a page title and a page identifier is a bad thing; but there's a facility in the software to make them read better (the | thing), and the benefit of making ad-hoc links easier to create for writers outweighed that concern.  Likewise, the benefit of easy searches, and being able to make lowercase links inside sentences that link to properly capitalized article titles far outweigh the awkwardness of this one case.  --LDC

2. I agree completely. The term "Global Green Parties" is exactly the one these parties use for themselves, and it does deserve to be covered more or less as it defines itself. Members of these are specifically "GlobalGreens" (all one word) which is a subset of "Greens" (Four Pillar type) which is a subset of "greens" (anyone who claims that breathing and drinking clean water is a moral necessity and has some weird rationale of that...)

That leaves room for all kinds of controversy and crap here in 'green party', and lets 'green' versus 'Green' live in the 'g/Green' def'n (where literally everyone on this planet can fight over it - this is no doubt where human society unifies itself, thank you for participating).

3. I apologize. It wasn't so much that you changed "Green Parties" to "organized Green Party", it was more that this came after a bunch of truly mindless hacks by someone else and was wasting my time at a moment when something else had to be done. I overstated my objections.

Now, would you like to do the honors, or should I?

Some people here think I'm really being a prig on this point, but since you came up with teh right solution, I'd like to let you settle it... an edit by me on this file is sometimes a target for someone's undoing.

 * I couldn't find the term "Global Green Parties" anywhere on the net. "Global Greens" is used, as is "Green Parties world wide". AxelBoldt

Then Global Greens refers to the members and supporters and vague fellow travellers of those parties and their Four Pillars, "Green Parties world wide" describes the general concept without committing to a specific idea of how they cooperate.

Also, as a side issue, GlobalGreens refers specifically to the conference and Charter from the 2001 Australia conference (which is treated in the article but is not given any exclusive status as defining the roles - it is a "Ten Key Values" rather than "Four Pillars" basis of unity, and not all Greens went...) - i.e. the GlobalGreens (all one word) are the very few people communicating at http://globalgreens.org

Whereas, the Global Greens are the very many people vaguely supporting the parties at http://greens.org

I believe those are the definitions they use themselves... which is fair in the longer article but not in this short one...

With all due respect to the 'gentleman' across the aisle, there is nothing wrong with putting an article topic in lower case. I do it frequently.

Remember to distinguish the article title from the URL, e.g., http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/greens

See sting for an example of an article about two uppercase Stings and two other lowercase stings.

Furthermore, when making a reference with double square brackets, you can use whatever capitalization you like: Sting is a British rocker, and a bee has a sting.

What's all the fuss about?

User:Ed Poor -- very good, always helps

- What's wrong with that approach is that like a dictionary, an encyclopedia must distinguish between Proper and generic names. It could do that with single or double quotes, in titles or URLs, but it must do it reliably.

http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Greens and http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/greens must be able to be different things in the same sense that http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Sting and http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/sting are totally different and unrelated things. URLs are case-sensitive after the domain name, for this among other reasons.

Another solution is two different name spaces, one for proper names and acronyms and attributions only, the other for generic use of terms that are contested in the language-space as opposed to in the meat-space...

The server appears to be case-insensitive for the first word of article names, and case-sensitive for words after the first. Try these:
 * http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/robert_heinlein - fails
 * http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/robert_Heinlein - works (surprisingly)
 * http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Robert_heinlein - fails
 * http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/Robert_Heinlein - works (as one would expect)

User:Ed Poor - I think we would agree that the server's convention is at best on crack.

Very dumb idea: add "the_" before proper names, so it's "the_Sting" (or as wiki presents it "The_Sting" umm oops well namespace problems again)... At least then "the_Green_Parties" is presented without a big problem, and "green_parties" can be given a neutral treatment. The wiki UI bug can be fixed later.

This is becoming important since there are distinctions made in [political economy] between generalized positions of [socialist parties], [capitalist parties], [libertarian parties] and [green parties] - which concepts should not be confused with current global associations of political parties that only *claim* to represent those points of view...

i.e. it's fairly clear that there is a difference between the dozens of [socialist parties] and the International Socialists, or the ILO, or etc., even though many groups would like to say that they represent all "Socialist parties", it just isn't true.

Likewise the U.S. Libertarian party isn't particularly libertarian about where deeds in land come from... straight from King George III.

This encyclopedia does distinugish between generic and proper names: by explaining, in plain text, the distinction (when needed) on a disambiguating page, which points to more specifically-named titles, all of which are capitalized, just as is done in every other encyclopedia in print (but not, as you point out, in Dictionaries--but Wikipedia is not a dictionary). That decision has already been discussed for months, ad nauseam, and that decision has already been made. We, as a community, had many long discussions about the various merits of doing it that way and 20 other ways, and we are all very smart people who came to our present decision on how the software works for many very good reasons, and your personal convenience wasn't one of them. If you want to participate here, you need to respect the conventions we have created, and work with the software we have produced, and stop whining about it.

I, like several other people here, am a professional writer, and I think the conventions we have here are very good. And as I point out, encyclopedias also capitalize article titles, and explain the distinction between generic and proper terms when necessary. The time for your arguments is past--now it's time for you to help us choose an appropriate title for the content which is now "Organized Green Party", but which you point out is not good. "Global Greens" is my preference, because that's what the actual greens.org web site uses. But if that particular organization is really a subset or superset of what the article describes (I don't know--you're the green fellow, my expertise is writing), then we'll have to use something different. So please, give us some suggestions that follow our conventions. Help us out. Work with us. --LDC

Sorry, but no matter how often you have this argument, or how many times you get it wrong, someone will always show up to point out that you've chosen a bad convention that defies the English language's dictionary conventions...

An offline encyclopedia can assume certain things about readers that an online one can't... the analogy is wrong. But whatever. A meta argument.

Let's take this entire issue to meta, where I presume a substantial debate already exists, and where a vast number of cases of confusion and reasons why an online and offline resource might need different conventions can be placed.

regarding this entry only:

Yes, the GlobalGreens claim to be the only representative of Global Greens. That is fine for them to claim, but not fine for us to accept. For one thing their Ten Key Values agreed in Canberra go further than the almost-universal Four Pillars (which almost any big-G Green would say depend on each other and define a consensus process as per Gandhi).

For another, there are very specific and I think reasonable objections to any system of sending representives to Australia to discuss and decide in English what a Green is, set up Global Green Coordination, Global Green Network, etc. http://www.globalgreens.org/story.php?id=6

There is an extremely eloquent statement of the objection here: http://www.globalgreens.org/story.php?id=6&cid=10#10

from which I quote:

"The appalling lack of grassroots democratic process in this virtual organization’s origin and ongoing existence is the most shocking development of the global green conference and egregious violation of Green principle. The total absence of a healthy debate or even one real conversation on this site is a more telling accusation than any solitary unread polemic I could post in this empty discussion.

It violates Peace & Nonviolence.

This proposal has done a terrible violence to our community’s fundamental beliefs in cooperation, collaboration and consensus. This unilateral global action by a consortium of state and national parties has, with terrifying lack of global thought, resulted in a forceful usurpation of our rights as local actors.

“Think Global, Act Local” is not a slogan. It is a binding oath, a solemn pact, a sacred bond, and a necessary separation of powers. Globalgreens.org was an opportunity to peacefully engage the locals, the very grass-roots of democracy, and provide them with sorely-needed technology for communication with each other. "

Talk about stepping in it! I don't think we should settle this debate for the Green Parties. I think we should basically relate that there is some valid difference of opinion about the role of representatives, meetings and former-colonial languages and new technologies in defining "Global Greens".

And that "GlobalGreens" i.e. .org, take one clear position on this, and that dissenters take another.

Fair enough? - As to your last few paragraphs, yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to do here, and you still haven't given me any suggested article titles. Of course we shouldn't get involved in the controversy--that's none of our business. But we should report on it, and cover the issue, and describe the parties involved, under some appropriate title, which we can choose as soon as you offer us some actual suggestions--and make several suggestions, because we simply won't be bullied into taking your first one at face value. We're a community here, and you will work with us as part of that community.

As to your first paragraph, I hate to pull out credentials, but this case merits it. I am willing to give you the benefit of the doubt about your knowledge of green politics--something in which I freely admit I have no expertise--but I am not willing to accept that you know how to write English prose, because every example I have seen tells me otherwise. I can write--that is my area of expertise, and unless you can demonstrate some credentials in that area, I ask that you acknowledge that that's my field, not yours. I identify myself clearly, and show my credentials up front on my pages. No other Wikipedians come anywhwere close to having as many pages selected for the "Brilliant Prose" page than me (maybe Magnus, I think, as he deserves to), and many of the editors I have written for have told me I should write more because I know what I'm doing (unfortunately I like money, so I write more software than prose), including the late lamented editor in chief and co-founder of this project. I'm an arrogant bastard myself sometimes, so I don't hold that against you, but please acknowledge that your word is not the final one on the subject of how to write a good encyclopedia article, and work within the guidelines established by those of us who really have put a lot of thought and effort into this project. --Lee Daniel Crocker

ROTFL. Well, now that everyone is standing on their dignity, we must be there!

Fair enough. I chose anonymity for a reason, and I can't simply throw in my own credentials for that same reason. You may well be the editor in chief by a sort of beta consensus, plus your sheer tenacity... but it's wonderful to keep a rolling consensus going... we learn so much more about ourselves...

I freely acknowledge myself a master baker er and ah a not bad ontologist. If there are horrible topics from hell that are defying neutrality itself, let me at 'em... although don't be surprised if the first try is 2/3 baked only...

It's a bit cheesy though to tell me that "every example I have seen tells me otherwise." C'mon. I must have written *one* article that does a masterful job of nailing the topic? One? OK, maybe not on the first try...

Umm... after acknowledging your writer guru-dom, I feel too humble to suggest a name for the "Green Parties" article... although you imply that the only one you would accept is "Green Parties world wide" since that is the strictest and least interpretive way to convey what you got from Google... and still in line with how greens are presented on greens.org - if not in line with the way they are presented on globalgreens.org (one of many such integrations of their purpose). The phrase "world wide" seems not to unify them conceptually more than the word Green or Parties does, although the term Global as in "Global Greens" or "GlobalGreens" does seem to make such a claim.

So leaving this article as "green party" and that one as "Green Parties world wide" is fine, leaving the door wide open to discussing the cooperation or an international party in another article called "GlobalGreens" or "Global Green Party" later on.

BTW there is a rather vast compendium of Green Theory over at Greenpeace... most of it kinda postmodern and weird... but if you enter "Greenpeace XXXX" on google where XXXX is a political, ethical, or anthropological term (like "moral", "ape", "mother", "primate", "ethic", "Gaia", "ark", "Elder", "Tribe") you find some quite amazing stuff... there are like 4600 anonymous posts over there... we have come nowhere near grasping the full depth of this subject, in the short exchanges we've had here.

You're confusing me with both Alex and Larry--you're reading seems to be as sloppy as your writing--but no matter. Alex is a reasonable person and I take his suggestions seriously. Hell, even Ed Poor has some good ideas now and then and I still listen to what he has to say (though I nearly always disagree).

As for all the stuff on the Greenpeace site, let's leave it there. This is an encyclopedia, not a place for philosophical debate. Except, of course, to report on philosophical debates that are deemed important in academic circles, covered as they would be in a traditional academic setting. Likewise, this isn't the place to create new green theories, only to report major existing ones (and both of those are important).

Yes, yet another page specifically for Global Greens is fine, so long as it does in fact accurately describe the single organization that calls itself that, and provides a link to that website for the non-encyclopedic details. I'd prefer "Worldwide green parties" to better fit our conventions for the present article, but I'm flexible on that score--I'm just not flexible on the naming conventions of the encyclopedia in general (and actually I'm reasonably flexible there as well to a good argument). --LDC - I can tell you and Ed apart, but not always you and Alex... based on text alone.

I'm not suggesting importing any of this Greenpeace debate, just noting that if Google is your standard for whether a distinction or a concept exists as a term of art, well... it's relatively easy to satisfy with things that might be comprehensible only to Greens... or only to Gaians... or only to greens on crack. 6.1 billion people have bodies and live in ecologies on this planet, and no one of them has a monopoly on defining the political meaning of body, ecology, or planet. That's it that's all. "Natural point of view" for those people is irreconcilable. "Neutral point of view" is hard to establish at best, and frankly the "worldwide Green Parties", such as they are, do a more rigorous and patient job of that "Many Natural --> One Neutral" integration than either of us, so the problem of establishing neutral point of view on *them* is one of the more complex problems imaginable...

Believe me, creating new theory is the last thing on my mind. I note for the record that I have probably read more than 2/3 of those 4600 anonymous posts at Greenpeace, and I probably understand about half of them... including the weird tone they sometimes take. So I consider myself a relatively reliable reporter of the "terms of art" in these debates.

If you ever doubt it, merely go there yourself to greenpeace.org and post (anonymously if you wish) a request for someone else to "come look at this".

BUt this is about the Parties and the ways they cooperate, not about theory.

Whatever convention we choose, we'd be best off with one that also applied to the libertarian, conservative, socialist parties...

As to "GlobalGreens" versus "Global_Greens", I can keep those terse and to the linguistic point. But since I am not allowed to differentiate "global_Greens" as well, to describe those who believe in the Green principles but not the specific Global_Greens conferences or GlobalGreens infrastructure, there may be a couple more entries here.

I am concerned that, as with Mutual_Assured_Destruction versus mutually_assured_destruction, people who know literally nothing about the underlying theory and strategy will jam together pointless mass media confusions from propaganda-addled military science textbooks that went obsolete in 1990... renaming stuff they don't understand, and making the whole matter, in their presentation, of only historical interest... not useful to actually understandt he topic in its current context...

I never suggested Google...that was Alex. Anyway, as I said, I totally agree that you're the green fellow, not me. How you choose to describe a group of people who hold certain beliefs but who are not specifically affiliated with an organization is one place where there is definite flexibility in the naming conventions--and also the question of whether they should be covered at all. Clearly, an encyclopedia must cover the organized groups under their official names (possibly with context modifiers to disambiguate where needed). Also clearly, we need to cover expansive terms like "environmentalist" and "green" that have entered the language and the common mindset, and define them inclusively. But as to the in-between groups, that's up in the air. I have no problem including them, but since they are so context-specific and narrowly defined, I think the good of the encyclopedia as a whole demands that they have long, accurate, descriptive, context-specific titles unlikely to clash with anything of more public currency. Minor typographical conventions aren't nearly enough; you need words, lots of words. I have no problem with a title like "Non-party-affiliated political groups emphasizing green goals", or whatever. That's not confusing, and specifically addresses your concern about people making confusing associations--the more specifically the article is titled, the less likely that is to happen. Simple titles like "green party" should be inclusive, and link to all the articles with other possible interpretations of that term. Likewise, articles named for a specific association are free to point out that the association's name might have other meanings, which also have links. --LDC

A seemingly reasonable method of deriving naming conventions is sheer numbers of adherents. Strange obscure groups like the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party can be referred to as, well, "green Nazis". Why not? That's what they say they are. But you can see the issue vs. "Green Nazis" since according to the Four Pillars vs. Uncle Adolf's ideas there can be no such reconciliation... messy. Easiest, since they are tiny, to just refer to them by their whole proper name.

Also employing that "numbers" argument, tens of millions of Europeans vote for the big-G Green Parties in the EU... and 2.7 million or whatever voted for Nader/Green Party of the US in 2000. And 2.4 million donate to Greenpeace. So assuming overlap and varying levels of commitment and inhibition, there might be 5-10 million bona fide Greens in the world who buy into some organized Green NGO or party.

That doesn't give them a monopoly on "green", since one could argue that there are 6.1 billion who must pay at least some attention to "green" issues like not getting cancer or avoiding radiation... but it might put them first in line as "people who got this first and had the deepest debates about it."

Not that I buy into a wholly-social notion of reality, but face it, I'd rather face a few dozen "green Nazis" trying to embed their stuff in the wiki than a few million "Greens" trying to take down the wiki for failing to differentiate them from Nazis strongly enough. You see the problem I hope...!

Where the hell did the stuff above come from? Is that even remotely on topic to what we're trying to work out here, or related to anything I've said? You seem to be a reasonably educated, well-informed guy; but you know, sometimes I really start to doubt your basic sanity. The Libertarian National Socialist Green Party should be called--surprize--the Libertarian National Socialist Green Party, and is. That's exactly the way I want it, exactly as I said above. Likewise, I said that aritlces "green" and "green party" should be inclusive, just as you seem to be saying. Do you think I'm disagreeing with you about that? Did you read what I actually wrote, or are you interpolating from what you assume I mean because I'm a capitalist pig or something? Please, give me some understanding of what it is the present "Organized Green Party" article is describing and how that relates to existing formal organizations, so that I can come up with a decent title for it. I don't want to muck with the content, because frankly I don't understand what half of it means, and I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that it actually does mean something

-

No, there's no disagreement, the "green Nazis" thing is only by way of example, maybe it's a bad example and I should have said "green Buddhists". BTW I consider the LNSGP analysis quite straightforward and have defended it - hell I've discussed it in depth with Jewish vegans. But socially there are lots of people offended by swastikas, and we're trying to get something done here on wiki, and few Nazis would say they have much to do with any peace movement, and few Greens would say they have much to do with Nazis, and the Four Pillars is the only citable difference. IT's not wrong to cite the LNSGP in the "Green Parties" article but it's misleading without identifying it as distinct from the Four Pillar parties which that article is about.

The generic term "green" lets both make their claims - and I still regret I can't keep it lower case to avoid any future combat over "Green vs. green". That's all I meant.

I said several times over, that the existing article at "Organized Green Party" should get back its original name "Green Parties", or the more formally correct "Global Green Parties" or the easily-justified "Green Parties world wide", either of which relate the way that the "Green Parties" who are "of global reach" cooperate or don't. I answered that question.

If you're waiting for *me* to change it's name, just say so, it'll be done.

We aren't disagreeing here at all, as far as I can see.

Done, thanks. In the heat of discussion, I too sometimes forget that the purpose of talk pages on Wikipedia is to discuss how to make better encyclopeia articles, and I am as guilty of digressing from that as anyone. --LDC

title: Talk:Green party/Archive-01


text:
Goregrind

Goregrind is a fusion genre of grindcore and death metal. British band Carcass are commonly credited for the emergence of the genre. Goregrind is recognized for its heavily edited, pitch shifted vocals and abrasive musicianship rooted in grindcore.

History
Despite the early impact of albums such as Repulsion's Horrified and Impetigo's Ultimo Mondo Cannibale, the origins of the genre really lie with the British band Carcass, who began their career in the late 1980s. In their Reek of Putrefaction era, Carcass used pitch shifters, medical imagery and several visceral associations—all of which are tropes that would become synonymous with goregrind.

Characteristics
According to Matthew Harvey, Gore-Grind (sic) music is characterized by its preoccupation with pitch-shifted or extremely low vocals, use of gore and forensic pathology as its exclusive subject matter, and often very fast tempos. Gore-Grind bands also have the refreshing tendency not to take themselves or their lyrics too seriously. This is evidenced by ... the often intricate and disgusting yet undeniably cartoonish splatter drawings that adorn many Gore-Grind album sleeves.

Zero Tolerance described goregrind as being defined by "detuned guitars, blasting drums (sometimes with a high-tuned, clanging 'biscuit tin' snare drum sound), sickening lyrics and often heavily processed/distorted vocals." Goregrind bands commonly use extremely low or pitch-shifted vocals. The lyrics' subject matter often features violent themes including gore, forensic pathology, death, and rape. Lyrics sometimes have a clear tongue-in-cheek Z-grade horror-movie feel and are not expected to be taken seriously. Cyjan, former drummer for Polish goregrind band Dead Infection, commented, "Musically, there's no real difference between grindcore and goregrind, but lyrically, whereas the first is socially and politically concerned, goregrind, as the name implies, deals with everything related to blood, pathological aspects or accidents with fatal results."

Pornogrind
Pornogrind (also known as porngrind or pornogore) is a microgenre, which is similar and related to goregrind, that deals with sexual and pornographic themes, hence the name. Notable bands include Gut and Cock and Ball Torture.

title: Goregrind


text:
Polish Radio and Television

Committee of Radio and Television "Polish Radio and Television" (Komitet do Spraw Radia i Telewizji "Polskie Radio i Telewizja") (also called as a Radiocomittee - Radiokomitet) was an institution, which managed all stations of Polish Television and Polish Radio in People's Republic of Poland (PRL) and in the Republic of Poland. It was replaced by two separate entities in 1993 - Polish Radio and Polish Television.

title: Polish Radio and Television


text:
Frank Hague

Frank Hague (January 17, 1876 – January 1, 1956) was an American Democratic Party politician who served as the Mayor of Jersey City from 1917 to 1947, Democratic National Committeeman from New Jersey from 1922 until 1949, and Vice-Chairman of the Democratic National Committee from 1924 until 1949. During his 30 years as mayor, Hague established reforms and innovations that upgraded the city's infrastructure and services, including the construction of parks, schools, and public housing. He also worked to secure funding for public works projects and attracted new businesses to the city, which helped to boost its economy. Simultaneously Mayor Hague had a dark reputation for corruption, extortion and bossism and has been called "the grandaddy of Jersey bosses". By the time he left office in 1947, he enjoyed palatial homes, European vacations, and a private suite at the Plaza Hotel. His wealth has been estimated to have been over $10 million at the time of his death, although his City salary never exceeded $8,500 per year and he had no other legitimate source of income.

During the height of his power Hague's political machine, known as "the organization", was one of the most powerful in the United States controlling politics on local, county, and state levels. Hague's personal influence extended to the national level, influencing federal patronage, and presidential campaigns.

Early life
Francis "Frank" Hague, born in Jersey City, was the fourth of eight children to John D. and Margaret Hague (née Fagen), immigrants from County Cavan, Ireland. He was raised in Jersey City's Second ward, an area known as The Horseshoe due to its shape which wrapped around a railroad loop. The ward was created when the Republican-controlled legislature gerrymandered a district within Jersey City in 1871 to concentrate and isolate Democratic, and mostly Catholic, votes.

By age 14, Hague was expelled from school before completing the sixth grade for poor attendance and unacceptable behavior. He worked briefly as a blacksmith's apprentice for the Erie Railroad. While training at a local gym for his own potential debut as a prizefighter, he arranged to become manager for Joe Craig, a professional lightweight boxer. Craig was successful enough to allow Hague to buy a few suits that made him appear successful. In 1896, Hague's apparent prosperity gained him the attention of local tavern owner "Nat" Kenny who was seeking a candidate for constable in the upcoming primary to run against the candidate of a rival tavern owner. Kenny provided Hague with $75 to "spread around", and Frank Hague quickly won his first election by a ratio of three-to-one.

Early success
Hague's victory in the Constable election brought him to the attention of Hudson County Democratic political boss "Little Bob" Davis, and Davis asked Hague to help get out Democratic votes for the upcoming 1897 Mayoral election. Hague's efforts were credited with generating large voter turnout in the Second Ward for the 1897 and 1899 elections. As a reward for his work, Hague was appointed as a deputy sheriff at a salary of $25 per week. Over this time, Hague took a leadership role in the Second Ward Democratic club.

In the 1901 Mayoral election, Republican Mark M. Fagan was elected. Hague's second ward was one of only two that voted Democratic. Hague survived a Republican challenge for a third term as Constable the following year.

The "Red Dugan" affair
As a ward leader, Hague was approached by a woman to provide assistance for her son, who had been arrested for passing a forged check. The son, Red Dugan, had been a classmate of Hague's in school. According to the Boston Evening Transcript of October 4, 1904, Dugan had deposited a forged check for $955 in the Peoples Bank of Roxbury, Massachusetts, and convinced the bank manager to let him withdraw $500. Hague ignored a subpoena to testify in Hudson County Court and traveled to Massachusetts to provide an alibi for Dugan. Hague and another deputy sheriff, Thomas "Skidder" Madigan, claimed that they had seen Dugan in Jersey City on the day of the alleged offense. Both were threatened with perjury charges.

Upon returning to Jersey City, Hague was found guilty of contempt of court for ignoring the subpoena. He was fined $100 and stripped of his duties as Deputy Sheriff.

In spite of the resulting press coverage of the event, Hague was more deeply embraced by his constituency. Thomas Smith wrote: "But to the residents of the Horseshoe, Frank Hague had gone out of his way to help a friend – had practically given his livelihood to aid a brother." In the succeeding municipal election of 1905, which saw the return of incumbent Fagan to the office of mayor, Hague was elected to a fourth term as constable.

Ward leader
Hague rose through the Democratic machinery of Hudson County, which drew much of its strength by providing newly arrived immigrants with rudimentary social services. Hague took a job as a bill collector for a local brewery, leaving him with time to spend in the streets and the local taverns which were hubs of political activity. He also spent his time cleaning up the loose ends of the Second Ward's south-end Democratic Club to consolidate his power.

As a reward for his efforts in turning out votes in the 1905 election, Bob Davis named Hague as the party leader for the Second Ward and arranged for Hague to be appointed as Sergeant at Arms for the New Jersey State Assembly.

Political reformer
Hague broke ties with "Boss" Davis in 1906 over a difference of opinion on a candidate for appointment to the city Street and Water Board. As a result, Hague supported H. Otto Wittpenn for mayor in the 1907 election. Wittpenn was a reformer who opposed the control Davis held over Hudson County politics. Over the objections of Davis, newly elected Mayor Wittpenn appointed Hague as chief custodian of City Hall – a "cushy" job with plenty of patronage opportunities. During the Wittpenn administration, Hague also became friendly with Wittpenn's secretary – a Presbyterian Sunday school teacher named A. Harry Moore.

The resulting battle for control of the Hudson County Democratic machine would ironically result in one of the greatest boosts to Hague's rise to power – the Walsh Act of 1911. In 1909 Davis, seeing support for Hague increasing, supported Wittpenn's re-election against former mayor Fagan. Hague's second ward produced the largest plurality of Wittpenn votes of any of Jersey City's 12 wards. Davis then arranged the appointment of Fagan to the Hudson County Tax Board. When Wittpenn's administration began facing troubles, including Fagan's discovery of a Pennsylvania Railroad property that had paid no taxes for four years, Wittpenn blamed Davis.

Seeking to curb the influence of Davis, Wittpenn announced his candidacy for Governor, stating "I have endured the machine as long as possible, but patience is no longer a virtue." Davis, in turn, prevailed upon Woodrow Wilson, then President of Princeton University, to oppose Wittpenn's candidacy. Wilson's victory was overwhelming even in Hague's ward, despite heavy-handed tactics used there. The Jersey Journal wrote: "Cops on duty were using clubs and blackjacks to assist Mayor Wittpenn and Frank Hague defeat the Davis men."

Wilson's reform-minded term as Governor saw the establishment of Presidential primary elections, introduced workers' compensation, and brought about passage of the Walsh Act which provided for a non-partisan commission form of municipal government that was greatly reflective of his academic writings in Congressional Government.

"Little Bob" Davis died of cancer shortly after the 1910 gubernatorial election leaving a vacuum in the power structure of the Hudson County Democrats. Wittpenn quickly endorsed the idea of converting Jersey City to a commission form of government, but was opposed by forces, including Hague, attempting to take control of the party. Hague campaigned heavily against the idea in the Horseshoe, claiming that such a system of citywide elected commissioners would erode the influence of the working-class and consolidate power among the city's elite. Wittpenn's opponents successfully petitioned for a change in the date of the vote on the charter change, moving it from September to mid-July, and the proposal was defeated. As a result of this campaign, Hague came under the scrutiny of The Jersey Journal, which had supported the proposed charter change. It was reported that Hague's older brother, a battalion chief on the city fire department, had been on "sick leave" for three years at full pay.

Hague reconciled with Wittpenn to support his re-election in 1911. Wittpenn then supported Hague's nomination for Commissioner of Streets and Water. Both were elected. The new position greatly expanded Hague's patronage authority. While City Hall employed a few dozen custodians, there were hundreds of workers in the Street and Water Department. Hague's work as head of the Department of Street Cleaners even convinced The Jersey Journal to endorse him as a "reform candidate" in the next election.

In the spring of 1913, having gained confidence in his own ability to assure himself a place on the commission, Hague supported the renewed effort to change the Jersey City government from the Mayor-Council model to a commission model under the recently adopted Walsh Act. This act would place all executive and legislative powers in a five-man commission, each of whom would head a city department. The five commissioners would choose one of their colleagues to be mayor. The vote for charter change passed, and the stage was set for Frank Hague's rise to power.

Commissioner
In 1913, the first election for the city commission saw 91 men on the ballot competing for five available seats on the commission. Hague finished fourth with 17,390 votes and was elected to the five-man commission. The only Wittpenn-supported candidate, A. Harry Moore, was also elected. As a result of having garnered the most votes (21,419) former mayor Fagan became the first mayor under this new form of government, and the only Republican to hold that title in Jersey City for the following 75 years. Hague was named public safety commissioner, with control over the police and fire departments. In the same year, Hague cemented his control of the Hudson County political machine by securing for himself the leadership of the Hudson County Democratic Organization Executive Committee.

Hague immediately set about reshaping the corrupt Jersey City police force with tough Horseshoe recruits. Hague spearheaded crackdowns on prostitution and narcotics trafficking, earning him favor with religious leaders. These enforcement acts went as far as Hague himself marching across local Vaudeville stages personally directing the shut down of "girlie shows." At the heart of this change was an inner cadre of officers known as the Zeppelin Squad or "zepps" who were personally loyal to Hague alone. The "zepps" would spy on, and report back to Hague about other members of the department. Eventually, Jersey City had one patrolman for every 3,000 residents, causing a marked decline in the city's once-astronomical crime rate.

Hague took steps to curb the police department's lackadaisical work ethic, punishing offenses that had gone unpunished for years. He also made much-needed improvements to the fire department; at the time he took office Jersey City's fire insurance rates were among the highest in the nation.

Upon discovering in early 1916 that millions of pounds of munitions were being stockpiled on the Jersey City waterfront, Hague travelled to Washington, D.C. to register concerns for the safety of his constituents. His meetings with Congressmen resulted in no action, Congress having decided that Jersey City was an "appropriate port." Hague's concerns were shown to be valid in July 1916 when the Black Tom explosion sent shrapnel flying across the city.

In 1917, Hague, with his reputation as the man who cleaned up the police force, ran for reelection. He put together a commission ticket called "The Unbossed." The ticket consisted of him, Parks Commissioner Moore, Revenue Commissioner George Brensinger, ex-judge Charles F.X. O'Brien and City Clerk Michael I. Fagan. It swept all five spots on the commission. Moore topped the poll, and traditional practice called for him to be appointed mayor. However, when the commission met for the first time on May 11, Hague was chosen as the new mayor.

Boss of Jersey City
Technically, Hague's only responsibility as mayor was to appoint the school board. Otherwise, he was merely first among equals, with no powers over and above the other four commissioners. However, soon after taking office, he wrested control of the Hudson County Democratic Party from Wittpenn. This allowed him to significantly influence the makeup of the commission in this overwhelmingly Democratic city. He soon built the organization into one of the most powerful political machines in the country. Hague himself became very wealthy, owning a $125,000 summer home in Deal, living in a large apartment in the best building in the city, and able to give a $50,000 altar to a local Catholic church. In 1941, Dartmouth professor Dayton David McKean wrote The Boss, a book about Hague's political machine, in which he estimated his amassed wealth at four million dollars on an annual mayoral salary of $8,000 a year.

He also had the support of a significant faction of Republicans which dated to his initial election as mayor, when he cut a deal with Governor Walter Edge in which Edge effectively ceded North Jersey to Hague in return for keeping South Jersey for himself. Also, as public safety commissioner (a post he held throughout his entire tenure), he controlled the two departments with the most patronage appointments in the city. This post also placed responsibility for maintaining public order in his hands.

Hague soon extended his influence statewide by helping to elect his "puppets" as governor. In the 1919 gubernatorial election, Hague endorsed State Senator Edward I. Edwards and aggressively campaigned for him. Edwards carried Hudson County by 50,000 votes, which was enough for him to win statewide by just under 15,000 votes. Hague proclaimed himself leader of the New Jersey Democratic Party, and Edwards allowed him to recommend dozens of appointments to high state offices. Democrats won five out of eight gubernatorial races between 1919 and 1940, more often than not due to massive landslides in Hudson County. However, he was never able to extend his dominance to the state legislature.

Hague was able to stay in power despite a nearly constant effort to turn him out of office from 1921 onward. He was also able to avoid prosecution despite numerous federal and state investigations in part because he took most of his kickbacks in cash. However, from the early 1940s onward, many of the city's longer-tenured ethnic groups started moving to the suburbs. They were replaced by Poles, Italians, Eastern Europeans and African-Americans. Hague never adapted his methods to the new groups.

Hague had little tolerance for those who dared oppose him publicly. He relied on two ordinances of dubious constitutionality to muzzle critics. A 1920 ordinance effectively required people making political speeches to obtain clearance from the chief of police. A 1930 ordinance gave the public safety commissioner—Hague himself—the power to turn down permits for meetings if he felt it necessary to prevent "riots, disturbances or disorderly assemblage." The latter ordinance was struck down as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States, but continued to be enforced for several years after that decision. The police were also allowed to stop and search anyone without probable cause or a warrant after 9 pm.

In 1932, Hague, a friend of Al Smith, backed Smith against Franklin D. Roosevelt during the race for the Democratic nomination. When Roosevelt won the nomination, Hague offered to organize the biggest political rally anyone had ever seen if Roosevelt would launch his presidential campaign in New Jersey. When Roosevelt formally began his campaign with an event at the Jersey Shore town of Sea Girt, Hague's machine made sure there were several thousand Hudson County voters looking on and cheering. Hague's support was rewarded with funding for a massive medical center complex complete with a maternity hospital named after his mother, Margaret Hague. During the 1936 campaign Hague provided 150,000 adults and children to cheer Roosevelt during a visit.

Hague's use of voter fraud is the stuff of legend. In 1937, for instance, Jersey City had 160,050 registered voters, but only 147,000 people who were at least 21 years old—the legal voting age.

FDR, a close political ally, was an active protector of Hague. In 1938, for example, Postmaster General James A. Farley reported to the president that a Jersey City machine functionary was reading the mail of one of Hague’s political enemies. Emphasizing that he had hard evidence, Farley proposed prosecuting Hague for both mail tampering and tax evasion. Roosevelt vetoed the idea responding to Farley: “Forget prosecution. You go tell Frank to knock it off. … But keep this quiet. We need Hague’s support and we want New Jersey.”

In 1932, Governor Moore appointed a lawyer named Thomas J. Brogan, who had served as Hague's personal attorney in corruption hearings, to an associate Justice seat on the state's Supreme Court. Less than a year later Brogan was named as Chief Justice. In at least two instances of alleged voting fraud in the 1930s (Ferguson v. Brogan, 112 N.J.L. 471; Clee v. Moore, 119 N.J.L. 215; In re Clee, 119 N.J.L. 310), Brogan's court issued extraordinary rulings in favor of the Democratic machine, in one case asserting that the district superintendent of elections had no authority to open ballot boxes, and in another case ruling that the boxes could be opened, but no one had the right to look inside. Brogan also assigned himself to the Hudson County jurisdiction, thereby controlling the local grand jury process and squelching other election fraud cases.

Retirement from politics
The beginning of the end for Hague came in 1943, when former governor Walter Edge was returned to office. Edge's attorney general, Walter Van Riper, initiated several prosecutions of Hague cronies. Hague retaliated by having his handpicked U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey bring federal indictments against Van Riper, but Van Riper was acquitted. Edge also initiated reforms in the civil service, freeing it from Hague's control.

Edge's successor, fellow Republican Alfred Driscoll, succeeded in further curbing Hague's power over state government. He led the effort to implement a new constitution, which streamlined state government and made it less vulnerable to control by locally based bosses like Hague. For example, county prosecutors were now directly accountable to the state attorney general. It also set up a new state Supreme Court, which was given supervision over the state's judges. As the first Chief Justice, Driscoll appointed an old Hague foe, Arthur T. Vanderbilt. Driscoll also installed voting machines throughout the state, which made it harder for corrupt politicians to steal elections.

Seeing the writing on the wall, Hague abruptly announced his retirement in 1947. However, he was able to have his nephew, Frank Hague Eggers, chosen as his successor. It was generally understood that Hague still held the real power. This ended in 1949 when John V. Kenny, a former Hague ward leader alienated by the appointment of Eggers, put together his own commission ticket. Due to the presence of a "third ticket," Kenny's ticket was able to oust the Hague/Eggers ticket from power, ending Hague's 32-year rule. Kenny soon set up a machine which proved every bit as corrupt as Hague's, but far less efficient at providing services.

Death
Hague died on New Year's Day in 1956 at his 480 Park Avenue duplex apartment in Manhattan, New York City. While hundreds gathered to see the casket depart the funeral home, only four men were seen to remove their hats for the passing of the coffin. One woman present held an American Flag and a sign that read, "God have mercy on his sinful, greedy soul."

Hague was interred in a large mausoleum at Holy Name Cemetery in Jersey City.

Legacy
Hague's pride and joy was the Jersey City Medical Center, which he began creating almost as soon as he became mayor. By the 1940s it had grown into a 10-building complex that provided virtually free medical care to Jersey City residents. At the time of its completion, the Medical Center was one of the biggest medical facilities in the country and included the Medical Center Hospital, Pollak Chest Diseases Hospital, Murdoch Hall, and Margaret Hague Maternity Hospital, named in honor of Hague's mother. The buildings, funded in part through federal funds obtained by Hague, are known for their Art Deco details, including marble walls, terrazzo floors, etched glass, and decorative moldings. Even at the time the Medical Center was too large to operate cost-effectively. In 2005 the 14 acre complex (much of which had fallen into disuse) was sold to a private developer who began converting two towers into a luxury condominium complex called the Beacon.

A 1993 survey of historians, political scientists and urban experts conducted by Melvin G. Holli of the University of Illinois at Chicago ranked Hague as the second-worst American big-city mayor to have served between the years 1820 and 1993.

Quotes
"We hear about constitutional rights, free speech and the free press. Every time I hear those words I say to myself, 'That man is a Red, that man is a Communist.' You never heard a real American talk in that manner." – speech to the Jersey City Chamber of Commerce, January 12, 1938.

"Listen, here is the law! I am the law! These boys go to work!" – speech on city government to the Emory Methodist Episcopal Church in Jersey City, November 10, 1937.

title: Frank Hague