text:
Armenian Catholic Church

The Armenian Catholic Church is an Eastern Catholic particular churches sui iuris of the Catholic Church. It accepts the leadership of the bishop of Rome,  and is therefore in full communion with the universal Catholic Church, including the Latin Church and the 22 other Eastern Catholic Churches. The Armenian Catholic Church is regulated by Eastern canon law, summed up in the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches.

The head of the sui iuris Armenian Catholic Church is the Armenian Catholic patriarch of Cilicia, whose main cathedral and de facto archiepiscopal see is the Cathedral of Saint Elias and Saint Gregory the Illuminator, in Beirut, Lebanon.

Armenian Caritas is the official aid organisation of the Catholic Church in Armenia.

History
The Armenian Church took issue with the 451 Council of Chalcedon and formally broke off communion with the Chalcedonian Churches at the 3rd Synod of Dvin in 610. Some Armenian bishops and congregations made attempts to restore communion with the Chalcedonian Churches after the 6th Ecumenical Council of 681. During the Crusades in 1198, the Church of the Armenian kingdom of Cilicia entered into union with the Catholic Church, an attempt that did not last. The union was later re-established during the Council of Florence in 1439, but did not have any real effects for centuries.

Some Armenians converted to Catholicism, and in the absence of any specific Armenian Catholic Church in effect became Latins. In medieval China, local Armenians were converted to Catholicism by John of Montecorvino in Beijing and there was also an Armenian Franciscan Catholic community in Quanzhou.

In 1740, Abraham-Pierre I Ardzivian, who had earlier become a Catholic, was elected as the patriarch of Sis. Two years later, Pope Benedict XIV formally established the Armenian Catholic Church. In 1749, the Armenian Catholic Church built a convent in Bzoummar, Lebanon. During the Armenian genocide in 1915–1918, the Church was scattered in neighboring countries, mainly in Lebanon and Syria.

An Armenian Catholic community was also previously formed by Armenians living in Poland in the 1630s. The Armenian bishop of Leopolis (see Armenian Catholic Archeparchy of Lviv), Nicholas (Polish: Mikołaj) Torosowicz had entered into union with the Catholic Church. The community which had been historically centered in Galicia as well as in the pre-1939 Polish borderlands in the east, was expelled after World War II to present-day Poland and now has three parishes: in Gdańsk, in Gliwice and in Warsaw.

There is also a history of conversion of Armenians in Transylvania, which went hand in hand with their acculturation under Hungarian influence and policies (see Gherla and Dumbrăveni). Their descendants are part of the Armenian community of modern-day Romania and are tended to by the Ordinariate for Armenian Catholics of Romania.

Liturgy and practices
The Armenian Rite liturgy, as celebrated in the Armenian language, developed prior to the post-Chalcedonian interruption of communion and hence is historically common to all Armenian Christians. It is patterned after the directives of Saint Gregory the Illuminator, founder and patron saint of the Armenian Church. It is used by both the Armenian Apostolic Church, by the Armenian Catholic Church, and by a significant number of Eastern Catholic Christians in the Republic of Georgia. Unlike the Byzantine Church, church buildings of the Armenian rite usually have only a few icons, but like some other Eastern churches have a barrier concealing the priest and the altar from the people during parts of the liturgy. The use of bishop's mitre is reminiscent of the influence Western missionaries once had upon both the miaphysite Orthodox Armenians as well as upon the Armenian Rite Catholics.

Armenian Catholic communities
Apart from Armenia, Georgia and Russia, the Armenian Catholic Church is found widely in the Armenian diaspora, notably in Lebanon (where the Armenian Catholic Church is headquartered), Syria, Egypt, Turkey, Iran, France, U.S.A., Canada, Argentina, Uruguay and Australia.

Armenia, Georgia and Eastern Europe

Armenian Catholics originated in what is today Armenia, Georgia and Eastern Europe. Beginning in the late 1920s, persecution caused many Armenian Catholics to emigrate. In 1991, after the fall of the Soviet Union, the Bishop of Rome, Pope John Paul II merged the communities in Georgia and Russia with those in Armenia, creating the new Ordinariate for Catholics of Armenian Rite in Eastern Europe, with its residence in Gyumri. The city was not chosen by chance: most Catholic Armenians live in the northern parts of Armenia. This has become a kind of basis for fence-mending with the coreligionists on the other side of the border.

Today Catholic Armenians of Samtskhe-Javakheti live together in Akhaltsikhe and in the nearby villages, as well as in the regions of Akhalkalaki and Ninotsminda. The communities in the last two regions, which are mainly rural, are found in rather distant areas, but the most important link is the historical memory of Catholicism.

A small seminary was established in Gyumri, Armenia, in 1994; there candidates for the priesthood engage in basic studies before moving to the Pontifical College of the Armenians (established 1885) in Rome, where they pursue philosophy and theology.

There are also tens of thousands of Armenian Catholics in Russia, due to the extensive migration from Armenia to Russia that has occurred since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

United States and Canada
Currently around 1.5 million Armenians live in North America, of which 35,000 belong to the Armenian Catholic Church.

In the 19th century Catholic Armenians from Western Armenia, mainly from the towns and cities of Karin (Erzurum), and from Constantinople and Mardin, traveled to the United States seeking employment. By the end of that century, many survivors of the Hamidian Massacres had concentrated in several U.S. cities, chiefly in New York. Catholic Armenian communities were also founded in New Jersey, in Boston and Detroit, as in Los Angeles and other cities of California.

Catholic Armenian educational organizations were also founded in many cities. In Philadelphia and Boston, colleges were founded  by Armenian sisters, educating hundreds of children. Later, a similar college was founded in Los Angeles. The Mechitarists in particular were preoccupied with the problem of preserving Armenian identity. With the support of the Mekhitarists of Venice and Vienna, the Mekhitarian College was founded in Los Angeles.

Many Armenians came to the United States and Canada from the Middle Eastern countries of Lebanon and Syria in the 1970s and in later years. Moreover, many Armenians migrated from Argentina, because of the economic crisis there. At the same time, many Catholic Armenians moved within the United States to San Francisco, San Diego, Chicago, Washington D.C., Atlanta, Miami and Indianapolis.

In 2005, by Pope Benedict XVI's decision, the Catholic Exarchate of the USA and Canada was raised to the status of a diocese. It serviced 35,000 Catholic Armenians in the United States and some 10,000 in Canada. The bishop, or eparch, of the diocese, which has jurisdiction over Canadian and American Catholics who are members of the Armenian Catholic Church, became Manuel Batakian. According to a news release by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops published on Monday, May 23, 2011, Pope Benedict XVI, named Archpriest Mikaël Antoine Mouradian, superior of the Convent of Notre Dame in Bzommar, Lebanon, as the new bishop of the Eparchy of Our Lady of Nareg in New York for Armenian Catholics. The appointment of Lebanon-born Bishop Mouradian was publicized in Washington on May 21 by Archbishop Pietro Sambi, Apostolic Nuncio to the United States.

France
Next to North America, France holds the largest number of Armenian Catholics outside the Middle East and Eastern Europe. The Eparchy of Sainte-Croix-de-Paris was established in 1960 with Bishop Garabed Armadouni as exarch. Since 1977, the eparchy has been led by Bishop Krikor Gabroyan.

There are some 30,000 Armenian Catholics in the eparchy, the headquarters of which are in Paris. Apart from the Cathedral of the Holy Cross in Paris, the eparchy has six churches: in Arnouville-lès-Gonesse, Lyon, Marseille, Saint-Chamond, Sèvres and Valence. A community of Mekhitarist Fathers resides in Sèvres and a convent of Armenian Sisters of the Immaculate Conception runs a school in Marseille.

Brazil
The Catholic Armenian Community of São Paulo was founded in 1935, as the Chaplaincy of the Catholic Armenian Mission, responding to requests from Armenian immigrants who had settled in Brazil since 1923, mostly from Marach, actually a city of Turkey. The church is between the metro stations Armênia and Tiradentes, at Tiradentes Avenue #718.

Demographics
Estimates from the 19th century varied between 40.000 to 150.000 Armenian Catholics worldwide, and 136,400 in 1911

Independent sources estimate the number of Catholic Armenians in the early 21st century at 150,000, with sizable communities in Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Jerusalem, France and the United States.

Structure
The Armenian Catholic Church is divided into Archdioceses, Eparchies, Apostolic Exarchates, Ordinariates for the Faithful of the Eastern Rite and Patriarchal Exarchates, each of which has functions similar to a diocese.

Current hierarchy
The Armenian Catholic Patriarchate of the See of Cilicia is the supreme authority of the Armenian Catholic Church. On 23 September 2021, Raphaël Bedros XXI Minassian was elected as the Church's new patriarch.

Below is a list of the jurisdictions with their number of adherents.

Titular Metropolitan Archeparchies
Achrida (Ohrid), Pessinus, Traianopolis in Rhodope

Titular Non-metropolitan Archeparchies
Chalcedon, Colonia in Armenia, Mardin, Nisibis of the Armenians, Sebaste, Tarsus

Titular Eparchies
Adana, Amida, Anazarbus, Ancyra, Artvin, Cesarea in Cappadocia, Garin, Kharput, Marasc, Melitene, Mush, Prusa, Tokat, Trapezus

Publications
The Armenian Catholic Church produces a number of publications:
 * Avedik, the official organ of the church
 * Avedaper Verelk, a religious, spiritual and cultural publication of St. Gregory Armenian Catholic Church
 * Avedaper, a weekly bulletin of the Armenian Catholic dioceses
 * Gantch Hrechdagabedin, official publication of the Our Lady of Bzommar Convent
 * Massis, a general monthly publication
 * Church bulletins

The Armenian Catholic Church has presses that publish many liturgical, spiritual books, publications, pamphlets and translations from general Catholic publications.

Other Sources

 * Arestakes Simavoryan. Armenian Catholic Community in Russia. 2010. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3883927
 * Arestakes Simavoryan. Catholic Armenians in Poland. 2011. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897582
 * Arestakes Simavoryan. Vahram Hovyan. Armenian Catholic and Evangelical Communities in Turkey: Modern Tendencies (in Armenian). 2011. ISBN 978-9939-825-18-2. http://noravank.am/eng/books/detail.php?ELEMENT_ID=6812

title: Armenian Catholic Church


text:
Talk:Battle of Munda

Ploy
What was the "unsuccessful ploy" that Caesar used to try to bring the Optimates off the hill? — Preceding unsigned comment added by AMWS (talk • contribs) 14:55, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Date
Do we know if the date is corrected for the Gregorian calendar?

 * The struggle in Spain was protracted for several months, but the decisive battle was fought at MUNDA, 17 March, 45, on the Guadalquivir, near Cordova. - Pennell, Robert Franklin, "Ancient Rome : from the earliest times down to 476 A. D"

 * Probably,. - Vedexent 15:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Both De Bello Hispaniensi and Plutarch say that the battle was fought on the Liberalia, that is, March 17. --Cam (talk) 02:22, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Details
This is not a very well written article, is it?
 * That is not a very constructive comment, is it? If you don't like it, do something about it. Piet 13:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

At least it is an article, but is it referring to legion X or legion XIII?

Gnaeus Pompeius
Did Gnaeus Pompeius die in the battle? The dagger next to his name seems to indicate so, but the article tells differently. Piet 13:10, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Removed it. Piet 09:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Octavian
I was unable to find any evidence of Octavian precence in the battle in the Ancient sources or in mdoern accounts of the battle (includign Appian, Dio Cassius and De Bello Hispaniense). In particular Nicolaus "Vita Caesaris" specifically states that Octavian was unable to reach Caesar in Spain because of sickness and that he met Caesar only in May. I am going to change the article accordingly. --Calabrian 11:31, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I've heard both that he could not make it, and that it was his first military command. But I can't remember where. I may have to scan biographical material on Octavian to see. It may be that he wasn't at the battle, but his biographers "exaggerated" later. - Vedexent 17:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

''Caesar saw that he must make one more struggle. He set out for the province accompanied by his nephew OCTAVIUS (afterwards the Emperor AUGUSTUS), and by his trusted friend and officer, DECIMUS BRUTUS. The struggle in Spain was protracted for several months, but the decisive battle was fought at MUNDA, 17 March, 45, on the Guadalquivir, near Cordova.'' - Pennell, Robert Franklin, "Ancient Rome : from the earliest times down to 476 A. D".

Introduction
The sentence in the introductory paragraph "His subsequent assassination began the process that eventually would lead to the end of the Roman Republic" is wholly inaccurate. While the assassination of Julius Caesar led to an immediate crisis (one of too many to count in those years), the the fall of the Roman Republic certainly began nearly 100 years earlier with the reforms of the Gracchi. 137.54.23.251 (talk) 15:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

The living dead
"Many of the Republican soldiers had already surrendered to Caesar in previous campaigns and had then deserted his army to rejoin Pompeius: they would fight with desperation, fearing that they would not be pardoned a second time (indeed Caesar had hitherto executed prisoners)."

Caesar must have been very surprised to see all these previously executed persons rising from the dead to fight against him again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.133.56.108 (talk) 07:27, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Surrendering doesn't mean being executed (excluding Thapsus) AMWS (talk) 14:54, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Caesar's Losses
"At the end of the battle there were about 30,000 Pompeians dead on the field; losses on Caesar’s side were much lighter, only about 1,000" a little later however the page says "What is clear is that the Munda conflict was no mop-up operation. Tens of thousands of Romans died at Munda, where Caesar fought for his life among the ranks" Now i may be wrong but it doesnt seem as if caesar's losses could only have been a 1000 soldiers if tens of thousands of romans died and caesar himself was in danger of his life among the ranks. Either the tens of thousands of bit is exaggerated in which case we remove the small line or the bit about about caesar's losses be increased or changed. Any opinions? Tca achintya (talk) 14:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Sentences in Prelude section all end in exclamation points
All of the sentences in that section end in exclamation points. Just wanted to bring it to someone's attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.73.33.2 (talk) 20:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Octavian and Agrippa were NOT subordinate commanders
I note that the Info Box states that the subordinate commanders at Munda were Octavian and Agrippa. I would suggest this is wrong and misleading. Wrong, in that Octavian wasn't even at the battle, arriving once the battle had concluded as a shipwreck had delayed his arrival (see Holland, Richard (2004). Augustus: Godfather of Europe, pg. 42). Misleading, in that Agrippa, who may not have even participated in the battle (see Reinhold, Meyer (1933). Marcus Agrippa: A Biography, pgs. 13-14), would have been a junior officer at best.

The role of subordinate commanders would have been held by Caesar's legates. According to Broughton (Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol. 2) at Munda there were at least three: Quintus Fabius Maximus, Quintus Pedius, and Gaius Caninius Rebilus. There is a possibility that Publius Cornelius Dolabella was also present. Unless anyone objects, I will make the change in the next few days. Oatley2112 (talk) 05:38, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Battle of Munda


text:
Talk:National Gallery of Art

Untitled
No offense USA-based friends but shouldn't this be at National Gallery of Art (USA) or suchlike? Every country's got (at least) one of the things.
 * Take a look at National Gallery—from the information in our articles at least, the U.S. one is the only one actually formally titled "National Gallery of Art"—please note that the article title is in all caps. Postdlf 12:50, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ownership contradiction
As of right now, this article says that the National Gallery of Art is both "privately owned" and "federally-owned." These two statements are strongly contradicting, since anything that is owned by the federal government of the United States of America belongs to "the people," making it, by definition, public. --Maande10 10:14, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe the "privately owned" claim is nonsense; looking at the history of the NGA on their website provides no basis for that claim. It was founded by private donations to the government.  At no point was it privatized.  I wouldn't doubt that part of its collection may be merely held in trust for private owners, but that would need to be verified in detail and specifically described.  Postdlf 18:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if either "federally-owned" or "privately-owned" is 100% correct. NGA is an odd case, but I know it's not part of the Smithsonian Institution, which itself is an educational institution (.edu website) that recieves appropriations from the federal government.
 * The best info that I can find is http://www.nga.gov/press/info.htm, from which I quote:
 * Funding Sources. The National Gallery represents a partnership of federal and private resources. The Gallery's operations and maintenance are supported through federal appropriations. All of the Gallery's acquisitions of works of art, as well as numerous special programs, are made possible through private donations and funds.
 * Do all the works of art (and the buildings?) belong to the federal government? The buildings are probably at least managed by the General Services Administration.  I'm guessing that NGA is somehow a quasi-federal entity.  Maybe another similar example is the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and PBS. --Aude 20:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The buildings certainly belong to the government. All the quote above says is that the government does not pay for the art the NGA acquires—private donors do.  It does not suggest private ownership.  Postdlf 20:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Certainly the museum isn't privately owned. To say it's federally-owned, I think, is somewhat misleading as it neglects the key role that private donations and funds play.  With that said, I have copyedited the article to get rid of both "privately owned" and "federally-owned" and have more explicitly stated how the museum is supported, to hopefully clear up any confusion.  --Aude 23:18, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

the drop down menu seems unnecessary
It would seem that the drop down menu on this page is unnecessary. Listing art collections according to the number of works that they own is not a particularly interesting or helpful way of understanding their position. This is because some art museums focus on the individual importance of a few works rather than the overall quantity of works in possession. I would argue that the drop down menu should be either removed or suppressed. It clutters the page without any real gain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.113.139 (talk) 19:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

"The National Gallery of Art has one of the finest art collections in the world"
Isn't this statement bias?Craigboy (talk) 03:38, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, but a reliable source for the claim would certainly be useful. David Trochos (talk) 06:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on National Gallery of Art. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061208014849/http://www.nga.gov:80/ginfo/aboutnga.shtm to http://www.nga.gov/ginfo/aboutnga.shtm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100407175119/http://www.nga.gov/ginfo/ngachron.shtm to http://www.nga.gov/ginfo/ngachron.shtm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091003215403/http://www.nga.gov/onlinetours/archtours.shtm to http://www.nga.gov/onlinetours/archtours.shtm#east

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on National Gallery of Art. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140926002206/http://www.nga.gov/content/ngaweb/visit/maps-and-information/sculpture-garden.html to http://www.nga.gov/content/ngaweb/visit/maps-and-information/sculpture-garden.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:48, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

File description
Hallo, anyonone hanging around who is able to explain the file name an the description of this work by Honoré Daumier on commons? To better understand:

Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 06:35, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Titian - Venus with a Mirror - Google Art Project.jpg

Include New Section
Hello! This page is well written, informative, and clear. The Operations subheading could use some updating. There are many new resources available through the National Gallery of Art that could be included here. SunRey451 (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
 * National Gallery East Building Lobby.pic.jpg

title: Talk:National Gallery of Art


text:
Prime Minister of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic

The prime minister of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is the head of government of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), a government in exile based in the Sahrawi refugee camps of Tindouf, Algeria. The post of the prime minister has been held by Bouchraya Hammoudi Bayoun since 13 January 2020.


text:
Izieu

Izieu is a commune in the Ain department in eastern France. It lies on the river Rhône, between the cities of Lyon and Chambéry.

The Commune is famous for the 1944 abduction by the Nazis of the children and staff from the Izieu orphanage.

Site of World War II Jewish orphanage

Izieu was the site of a Jewish orphanage during the Second World War. However, most of the children were only separated from their parents or sent purposely in the Savoy mountains which was then under Italian rule. Italy was less oppressive in that time. On 6 April 1944, three vehicles pulled up in front of the orphanage. The Gestapo, under the direction of the 'Butcher of Lyon' Klaus Barbie, entered the orphanage and forcibly removed the forty-four children and their seven supervisors, throwing the crying and terrified children on to the trucks.

As a witness later recalled: 'I was on my way down the stairs when my sister shouted to me: It's the Germans, run away! I jumped out the window. I hid myself in a bush in the garden. I heard the cries of the children that were being kidnapped and I heard the shouts of the Nazis who were carrying them away.'

Following the raid on their home in Izieu, the children were shipped directly to the "collection center" in Drancy, then put on the first available train towards the concentration camps in the East.

Forty-two children and five adults were gassed in the concentration camp of Auschwitz. Two of the oldest children and Miron Zlatin, the superintendent, ended up in Tallinn, Estonia, and were killed by a firing squad.

The orphanage director Sabine Zlatin survived the Gestapo raid, being away collecting funds for the institution. Some 40 years later she testified against Barbie at his trial. Towards the end of her life, she convinced the president François Mitterrand to turn the orphanage premises into a memorial.

title: Izieu


text: User:AdamJacobMuller

title: User:AdamJacobMuller


text:
Gérard Latortue

Gérard Latortue (19 June 1934 – 27 February 2023) was a Haitian politician and diplomat who served as the prime minister of Haiti from 12 March 2004 to 9 June 2006. He was an official in the United Nations for many years, and briefly served as foreign minister of Haiti during the short-lived 1988 administration of Leslie Manigat.

Career
In February 2004, the country experienced a coup d'état which saw the removal and exile of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Breaking with the Haitian constitution a "council of the wise" was set up by the international powers to choose a new Prime Minister. Latortue was selected by the council and appointed head of the interim government on 9 March while still living in the United States, and was sworn in on 12 March.

His administration was recognized by the United Nations, the United States, France, and Canada. He was denied recognition by the governments of Jamaica, Venezuela, and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). His government was beset with opposition from the Fanmi Lavalas political party (and with them, a large amount of the Haitian populace) and violence by and between gangs, rebels, and militants (especially in Port-au-Prince and its metropolitan area), many of whom are either former members of the Haitian Armed Forces (disbanded by Aristide in 1995 ) or street gang supporters of the Aristide government "Chimere".

The 2006 elections in Haiti, to replace the interim government of Latortue established after the 2004 Haitian coup d'état, were delayed four times after having been originally scheduled for October and November 2005. The elections finally took place on 7 February 2006. The 129 member Haitian Parliament was also elected at this election. Run-off elections for the Chamber of Deputies of Haiti were held on 21 April 2006. In June 2006, Latortue was succeeded by Jacques-Édouard Alexis.

Latortue was the head of the observer mission of La Francophonie in Togo for that country's October 2007 parliamentary election.

Personal life and death
Latortue had three children. His daughter, Alexia, currently serves in the United States Department of the Treasury.

Latortue died after a fall on 27 February 2023, at the age of 88.

title: Gérard Latortue


text:
User:Sj/miraclesofwordplay

 * Anti-rules Ha. Ha.
 * Svente, from w:it, w/list of O2, CO2, urine, solid matter, etc. input and output over her fabulous lifetime. (-:

 * A COMPLETE BIO TEXT!!! bz will go nuts.

 * Britannica flaws catalogued by friendly WPans, sometimes 6 mo old after multiple notes sent to the EB webmasters.

 * Joi Ito, anon on the Net
 * Dumbest moments in Gaming
 * WSOP
 * Wik's contributions
 * Claudine and her many websites!
 * Claudine and her many websites!

title: User:Sj/miraclesofwordplay


text:
Talk:Al Gore/Archive 3

Question about article size and pictures
Does anyone agree/disagree with the following observation on my part--this article seems way too bloated and either needs cutting or to have portions spun off into separate articles, and _eight_ pictures is about five too many, even for a notable politician like Gore? Just curious if I'm alone here. Jwrosenzweig 00:44, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. Some of the stuff in this article would be much better of under its own sections. As long as the images are relevant to the content however, I don't see a problem with it... --Vikingstad 00:50, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Seems OK to me, long but well organized, so the reader can easily find a particular portion. I'd leave it. JamesMLane 00:53, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I think this is going to be a recurring problem on Wikipedia--our article on George W. Bush is many times longer than our article on Thomas Jefferson. Modern political figures always will get excessive attention relative to their historical importance; I think the best thing to do is roll with it.  As for the pictures, you have a point. Meelar 00:59, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I think we should take the non-public domain or GFDL images out, because we already have plenty without them. I'm also in favor of spinoffs, if it can be done in a manner that is neutral. Anthony DiPierro 01:58, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Let's try to remove rambling and irrelevant material before splitting. --Jiang 03:26, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I said a while back that the controversies should not go into the main article, but again some showed bias against Gore by having a double standard. Now I am sure you are wanting to remove valuable info. User:ChrisDJackson

 * What do you people have against info on Al Gore? I don't see this being talked about on the Kerry or Bush page.  It seems people have a bias against Gore and it shows. User:ChrisDJackson
 * There is no conspiracy here against Al Gore. We just want to get things right. Keep working hard at these articles. Your energy is a benefit to the wikipedia project! Kingturtle 04:05, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC) P.S. please start adding a time-stamp to your signatures with a fourth ~.
 * I have been trying to better cooperate with others and follow the rules. However, Anthony and Rick continue to lie and exaggerate about me.  If they dedicated the energy that they use harassing me editing pages, the encyclopedia would be full.  But just look at my profile page.  I have edited quite a bit of pages in a short time.  I just don't know what some people's problem is.  They started this from the very begining against me and now I am trying to ignore it and continue to try to do better and they make it hard.  So please stop trying to discredit me on everything I do.User:ChrisDJackson
 * Chris, yes, you have been doing a great job at cooperating and doing this by the book. I commend you. Continue to work hard. Actions speak louder than words (although in wikipedia, actions ARE words....heh). Keep a level-head, and review Staying cool when the editing gets hot if you haven't done so lately. I'll drop Anthony and Rick friendly messages about this on their talk pages. Kingturtle 04:23, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC) P.S. please start adding a time-stamp to your signatures with a fourth ~ .  Kingturtle

Thanks again KingTurtle. What do you mean with a fourth~? I am courious. Also, I am emailing someone to confirm about the copyrights of the Gore2000 site. ChrisDJackson
 * Regardless of the copyright issue, can you find a compromise version of the information? You have been very reasonable. - Texture 04:37, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, all I ask is to quite being harassed everytime I edit the page. I want the Gore Views section to stay along with the pics of Gore as a congressman, VP, running for Pres, and bearded.  I would also like to see more about him as VP like what you rewrote.  Eight years is a long time for just a few sentences.ChrisDJackson 04:40, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Let's begin with these two disputed paragraphs. If you add them and anyone reverts you they will lose support for their actions and will have trouble explaining it in regards to a dispute with you.  We can focus on each change here at the talk page before the edit war starts.  You can start by adding a new section here in the talk page on the next section you would like to add.  - Texture 04:45, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Protected
I have protected the page following the many reverts. I haven't reviewed the copyright but can we resolve this through a rewrite? Are these the disputed paragraphs? - Texture 03:31, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Al and Tipper Gore have been a pair of the strongest voices for America's families. Each year the two host the Family Re-Union policy conference in Nashville which has promotes new initiatives strengthening fatherhood, increasing flexibility for mothers and fathers in the workplace, and giving parents more control over information that comes into their homes.  In 2002, the Gore's co-wrote two books about the modern American family.  (Joined at the Heart and Spirit of the Family)

 * For eight years as Vice President, Al Gore was a key member of President Clinton's economic team. Gore casted the tie-breaking Senate vote for the plan in 1993, which led to the first balanced budget in 30 years. Also to the credit of the Clinton-Gore administration is: the longest peacetime economic expansion in American history, with over 22 million new jobs, wages rising twice the rate of inflation, the lowest African-American and Hispanic poverty on record, the highest level of private home ownership ever, more investment in our cities, and the lowest unemployment in 29 years.

Can they be rewritten to avoid a direct copy of the Gore campaign web site? How about this:

 * Al and Tipper Gore host a Family Re-Union policy conference in Nashville.  This is where Al and Tipper are a strong voice for America's families through promotion of fatherhood, workplace flextime for parents, and control over what information can be accessed in their own home.  Al and Tipper are co-authors of Joined at the Heart and Spirit of the Family about the modern American family.

 * The Clinton-Gore administration is credited by the Gore campaign with "the longest peacetime economic expansion in American history, with over 22 million new jobs, wages rising twice the rate of inflation, the lowest African-American and Hispanic poverty on record, the highest level of private home ownership ever, more investment in our cities, and the lowest unemployment in 29 years." During his two terms as Vice President, Al Gore contributed as part of President Clinton's economic team and casted the deciding vote in the Senate in 1993 that led to the nations first balanced budget in 30 years.

Any comments? - Texture 03:31, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I rewrote each section on my own but I don't guess that was good enough. But the above is fine.  I still don't see what the big deal about using the info as is if the organization no longer exists.

User:ChrisDJackson

It's questionable whether adding this paraphrased version is legit. But if you're going to add it, you certainly need to add the source to the bottom as a reference. Anthony DiPierro 04:59, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Any set of facts can be presented in a different manner. Do you have any suggestions? I have cited the Gore campaign for the quote included. - Texture 05:05, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I suggest Chris be banned and all his contributions reverted. Those which are clearly from NPOV public domain sources can stay, I guess. Anthony DiPierro 05:11, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Anthony, this behavior of yours is not going to fly. Texture and I are trying to work this situation through a solution. I would appreciate your cooperation. Please put your best foot forward. :) Kingturtle 05:18, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * What behavior is not going to fly? You (more specifically, Texture) asked for my suggestion.  Chris has made a complete mess of the Al Gore page and dozens of other pages.  Sorting through these pages to find out what is legit and what isn't is going to take a very long time, and the longer he is allowed to do this, the worse it's going to be. Reverting all of his edits now is the best solution. Anthony DiPierro 05:21, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * How about something constructive? :) Kingturtle 05:26, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Gore 2000 Website Issues
I just got an email from arhcive.com which now houses the Al Gore campaign site of 2000 about use of it's content and here is what she says:

''Hello, Copyrights are a very tricky area of the law, and I am not a lawyer. Therefore I cannot answer you with a definite yes or no answer to your question. '''The general terms of use for the site state that the items on the site can be used for non-commercial use'''. However you are still dealing with potentially copyrighted information. It might be wise to try to get in contact with the people that used to run the site. They might still have an email address still working from the old site. Since it is for Gore, there is probably still some staffers or volunteers still working for him that were involved with the site.

Hope this helps, Astrid Bragg Office Manager Internet Archive astrid@archive.org''

Really, I don't think any of the Gore people would care and as the lady said, as most campaign sites are, you can use it non commmercially.

ChrisDJackson 04:07, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Chris, the content you submit must be written by you. If it's not written by you, then you should identify your source both in your submit comments as well as within the text as a reference.  And then you can only submit works which are either explicitly released into the public domain, or explicitly released under the GFDL.  Alternatively, you can sometimes submit content which was created before 1923, but that gets tricky. Anthony DiPierro 13:43, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Also, a non-commercial license is not appropriate for Wikipedia, because the GFDL does not allow for restrictions on commercial use. Agains, all part of the burden of being a free-as-in-speech encyclopedia. Martin 02:05, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Al Gore/discussion archive - I think Chris wanted to clear the page for ongoing discussion. I am archiving to this location - feel free to return any unresolved issues back to this page but preferably one at a time. - Texture 03:52, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * The copyviolation discussion is obviously unresolved. Anthony DiPierro 03:20, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Gore's grandfather
Perhaps we could open this entry briefly to correct a clerical error? Al Gore was not the grandson of Senator Thomas Gore; his grandparents were Allen Gore and Margie Denny. Allen Gore was a farmer in Tennessee, and, as far as can be told, had no relation to the Senator from Oklahoma. TMiscia March 25, 2004

I've made this fix on the temporary page. Perhaps Gore was confused with Gore Vidal. -24.13.224.74 23:27, 28 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate it. I didn't want people to get confused on that point. Al Gore being Gore Vidal's first cousin would've made quite a story if it were true, though. -TMiscia 1:36, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Gee, Vidal's one of those who thinks he's cousin (degree never specified) to AG ... but this trace of the ancestry finds no New World relation in the Gores. (But it did find AG and Nixon are cousins (~8th degree), which would doubtless delight Vidal =) 142.177.121.225 15:34, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

---

Plagiarism fight between ChrisDJackson and AnthonyDiPierro
Where do you see material that is in the article plagarized from that page. I believe you need to get glasses and a life. ChrisDJackson 01:22, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Are you admitting that you didn't write the material on that page? Anthony DiPierro 01:23, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

From what i can gather, from the page you noted Anthony, Chris used a quote by Al Gore. Its verbatim, because its a quote. In the article is signaled with "" and atributed to Gore. I see no problem with it. Anthony, can you point precisely the copyvio you are sugesting, except this quote? Chris, can you stop insulting people in edit summaries? It doesnt look good neither helps the discussion. Muriel 01:29, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It's more than just a quote, and I'll point to the plagiarism as soon as Chris admits that he did not write the content at that page. Anthony DiPierro 01:30, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Anthony, please bring a more mature attitude toward these discussions. Stop playing games. There is no need to force a confession out of a user. Point out the plagerism now. Kingturtle 01:32, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't know if it's plagiarism or not until he answers whether or not he wrote it. Anthony DiPierro 01:35, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Then why are you claiming it is plagiarism, if you are not sure? Muriel 01:38, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Because I assume Chris didn't write the content on that page. Anthony DiPierro 01:39, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I wrote the material that is in this article with references from sources, but there is nothing on that page that is plagarized into this article. And I will no longer respond to your stupid, lying, aggravating, nagging, bitchy, behavior. Instead, I will let the mods. ChrisDJackson 01:33, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

ChrisDJackson 01:33, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * No I can't stop insulting him as long as he keeps following me and engaging in edit wars. This has become a daily thing with him with numerous members.  This process would go much smoother without him.  He makes false and exaggerated claims and is just annoying with his copyvio BS.  If you or any other mod can't stop it, I have to defend myself.

Chris, when you copy something from another page, even if you change a few words around, you still have to acknowledge your source, and you should not claim that you wrote it, doing so is plagiarism. Anthony DiPierro 01:37, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * No its not, thats called doing research. But to know that, you would actually have to write articles... Muriel 01:38, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Claiming someone else's words are your own is plagiarism. And unlike Chris, I actually do write articles, not copy them from other places. Anthony DiPierro 01:41, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Such as... Muriel 01:41, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Such as this example right here. He copied it from this source (or another which this source derived itself from), changed around a few words, and claimed that he wrote it himself. Anthony DiPierro 01:42, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * No, Anthony, articles you wrote here. And i am still waiting for the exact copyvio, except of the quote Muriel
 * I've wrote a number of articles here. If you're going to personally attack me (as you have done on numerous occasions), at least try being correct. Anthony DiPierro 01:54, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * That is what i want to know: which articles (note the plural) and not stubs or redirects, have you written here? Muriel 02:03, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Why do I need to list them to you? Anthony DiPierro 02:05, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

There is one quote! What the hell is your problem? You have a disorder. You are on here 15 hours a day and do this most of the time. He has nothing else better to do than to troll and agravate other people via reverting their edits and such. The mods should step in and do something because he does this daily to numerous folks, just check out the page that lists his edit wars. ChrisDJackson 01:44, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * In the debate, Gore pointed out that Perot had profited from a ?free trade zone? run by the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, and asked, ?If it?s good for him why isn?t it good for the rest of the country??

 * Gore pointed out that Perot himself had recently profited from a "free trade zone" that was run by the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, and quipped, "If it's good for him why isn't it good for the rest of the country".

OK, you added the word recently and changed asked to quipped.

 * Public opinion polls showed that Gore had won, and that a majority of Americans now supported NAFTA.

 * Shortly thereafter, opinion polls showed that Gore had won the debate and that a majority of Americans now supported the passage of NAFTA.

Added "shortly thereafter", "the debate", and "the passage"

 * Your point is? That is not plagirism!  You need to re take you so called law classes.  Those sentences are nothing alike and are far from plagirism.  The sentence with the quote is the closest, and that is because the whole sentence is nearly a quote, along with my inserted words.  So again, you  have no basis.ChrisDJackson 01:57, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * You're right. It's not plagirism [sic].  Anthony DiPierro 02:05, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Chris, please do not copy and paste content from other sites without permission, even if you modify it slightly. Use your own words instead. Please allow Anthony to remove or rewrite these sentences, or propose an alternate wording.—Eloquence 02:07, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

No, because there is only 1 sentence that is even close and that is because most of the sentence is a quote. I will not have my work re-wrote everytime this ass throws a fit. I refuse. ChrisDJackson 02:10, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Look, it's not about this particular contribution. This is the tip of the iceberg.  Nearly every single time Chris writes something, it's from somewhere else.  The times I don't find evidence of his plagiarism, it's probably just that I haven't searched enough.  And then, even after he is challenged, he lies and says that he wrote it himself.  Even when presented with direct evidence, he claims that it's some sort of coincidence that his sentence just happens to be exactly the same with a few words added to make it more difficult to detect.  I shouldn't have to chase down every single instance and point out exactly where it came from. Anthony DiPierro 02:11, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes you should. Kingturtle 02:12, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Why should I? Anthony DiPierro 02:14, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Anthony, it would be desirable if you would compile a page such as Matter of Chris Jackson evidence where you would collect such instances, with diffs and the sources where they are from. I am sure that as soon as there is some evidence, other people will start to help you.

Chris, if Anthony is indeed correct, it would be best to just admit it now and pledge not to copy and paste in the future. We won't hold it against you. If you do so we can go through your contributions together and remove/rewrite any instances of copy and pasting from the past. If he is incorrect you can of course lay back and wait for him to come up with evidence which you say does not exist; however, if it turns out that you deliberately deceived us, it is quite likely that sanctions will follow.—Eloquence 02:15, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

 * I've begun one at Requests for comment/ChrisDJackson/, but that's just a small sampling of his many edits. Eventually sanctions will follow, but in the mean time it is becoming harder and harder to clean up the mess he is making. Anthony DiPierro 02:19, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * By the way, it doesn't seem that he is literally copy pasting. His edits commonly have mispellings that weren't in the original.  Anthony DiPierro 02:20, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Anthony you are the liar. I did write the stuff I added.  Of course I had sources, but those are my words besides the quotes.  You not only reverted the part in question but other areas of what I wrote, therefore you are lying becuase you said you only reverted because I plagarized.  But I again, if you can read, that is my work.  Unlike you, I actually make useful contributions.

ChrisDJackson 02:17, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Go ahead, look at all my contributions today on the page. From the Perto debate to the Clinton scandal. I care not. I think I will be vindicated from this bullshit when it is over. ChrisDJackson 02:18, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK, here's one
http://www.infoplease.com/spot/algore1.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Al_Gore&diff=2811190&oldid=2811153

Gore has mostly been a behind-the-scenes player. Early in Clinton's first term, the president enlisted Gore to study the entire federal government to pinpoint wasteful areas. Gore's National Performance Review guided Clinton when he downsized the government. The vice president was also instrumental in the passage of 1993's North American Free Trade Agreement.

During his time as Vice President, Al Gore was mostly a behind the scenes player. However, he is widely considered to be the most active and best Vice President in modern US history. On the request of President Clinton, Gore wrote National Performance Review, which pointed out bad areas of the federal government and later helped guide President Clinton when he down sized the government. Gore was also very instrumental in the passing of 1993's North American Free Trade Agreement.

Just the first one I happened to look at. Anthony DiPierro 02:33, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

And that relates to the current article how? I told you this is my words, if you can't accept that and move on, fine. You have no life anyway. You are on here 15/7. You must have no job, family, hobbies, etc. Your life revolvs around having wars with people who can't actually kick your ass over the internet. If you can't find anything better than a stupid quote and say that you can re-phrase a sentence so taht it isn't copyvio, then you have nothing, just as I suspected. ChrisDJackson 02:38, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Chris, will you please refrain from insults and personal attacks? If you have such admiration for Al Gore, take a lesson from him. As upset as Gore got in his political career, he did not stoop to the level of name calling and insulting. He kept his cool. Think always, Chris: What would Al do? Kingturtle 02:45, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * No one harrassed Al Gore as this person does me along with others here. If they had, I am sure they would have been put away.  Namecalling is common in politics all the time and this is no different.  He lies and exaggerates to make his points and just loves edit wars.  The only person in politics he can be compared to is probably Ken Starr or Newt Gingrich.  It makes me want to pull my hair out and no one will help!  ChrisDJackson 02:49, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Al Gore was harassed often. Ever hear of Rush Limbaugh? As for Ken Starr and Newt, when did Al ever blow his top in regards to them? In fact, when did Al ever blow his top?!?!? Take a lesson from Al. What would Al do? Kingturtle 02:57, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * I can see your point. I often tell my members on my site that.  However, it is harder to do than it is to say.  Again thanks, Chris.
 * Honest....take a lesson from Al. The man has poise and rises above the frey. Take note. And practice it :) Kingturtle 03:02, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Yea the right wing ate him up in 2000, but he kept his cool. However, I feel that might of contributed to his loss by not refuting their lies and exaggerating.  I beleive that my temperment is more of that of Howard Dean.  I have a very short fuse and don't take much, espeacially if it is redundancy.

But thanks for your words of wisdom. I agree, Gore is a man of poise and or respect. That is why I told him he is my mentor. :) ChrisDJackson 03:07, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Sam Nunn - what about this page, Chris? Did you copy it from http://www.nti.org/b_aboutnti/b1b.html, as ElBenevolente is alleging? Anthony DiPierro 03:11, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Uh yes, it is not copyrighted and is in the public domain. You know usually if I put: Adapted from......... that means I got it from there. Get a clue. ChrisDJackson 03:19, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I didn't accuse you of anything. I only asked a question, based on an accusation by ElBenevolente. Do you have any evidence that it is public domain? Because the site I looked at didn't have any statement of such. Anthony DiPierro 03:26, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

This is a common mistake. Content does not need a copyright notice to be copyrighted -- see copyright. You can't just assume a text to be in the public domain just because it doesn't say otherwise.—Eloquence 03:28, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

number of images
Does this article really need eight images of Gore? Kingturtle 23:48, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Some of the captions should be change like the one about "speaking forceible" might be a bit pov plus i see the same pix of Gore and Bush at the debate is here too, It makes more sense to be here since Gore is in the foreground but probably should be replaced at the Bush page

Canada?
"Gore considered all these options".....Gore considered running away to Canada? Has he ever said that? Kingturtle 05:27, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Phrasing
"Although Gore won the nationwide popular vote by more than 500,000 votes, he eventually lost the election by 5 electoral votes, with the outcome ultimately decided by the few hundred votes in Florida. In the end, Gore recieved the most votes of any Democrat in U.S. history."

I removed the bolding. It's unnecessary. I took out "eventually". Also unnecessary (and somewhat misleading, he lost, not eventually, at the time of the electoral college vote, same as any other election). I also removed "the outcome ultimately decided by the few hundred votes in Florida." This is awkwardly phrased. The outcome was decided by many factors. The election hinged on Florida no more than any other state with at least 5 electoral votes. The election hinged on the Supreme Court. The election hinged on Nader. The election hinged on Katherine Harris certifying the vote. The election hinged on the butterfly ballot. I had tried phrasing it as "A swing of only a few hundred popular votes in Florda would have caused the election to go the other way" but this was not accepted by ChrisDJackson. Finally, in the last sentence, I removed "In the end". Again, unnecessary, somewhat POV, and misleading. Oh yeah, and I fixed the spelling of "received". anthony (see warning) 22:04, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It also hinged on Harris' diddling of the voters lists and those electronic "voting" machines, one of which tried to take ±16000 votes from Gore in a poll -- Volusia 216 -- with only ±600 electors. The chad flap was just diversion to encourage elimination of all the paper trail next time around. 142.177.121.225 15:58, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Read history books, the election hinged on Florida. After 36 days, that is eventually. In the end refers to the finality after the recounts. Nothing hard to understand there, you are just trying to start another edit war. ChrisDJackson 22:09, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * If two baseball teams are tied going into the last day of the season, and one wins its game while the other loses, it's common to say that the last game decided the pennant. Logically, one might argue that the pennant was decided on the day back in July when the eventual winner swept a doubleheader from the eventual loser, thus swinging two games in the standings, not just one.  Nevertheless, it's fairly common to point to the last-in-time event as the decisive one.  By analogy, I think Chris's emphasis on Florida is correct.

 * To accommodate Anthony's objection, though, the reference should make clear that the disposition of the Florida electoral votes was decided after all the other factors, such as Nader, had worked their influence. I've tried to craft a sentence that's suitably NPOV for both disputants. JamesMLane 23:00, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Had Gore carried his home state he would have won the White house oh wait he did carry DC never mind. No seriously he would be Prez today had he won TN

"One of the most powerful..."
To the anonymous user who keeps adding the "most powerful" language: Several of us keep deleting it. Can you provide objective support for the contention that your view is "widely" shared? Otherwise, we can probably outlast you. :) JamesMLane 03:37, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Al Gore/Archive 3


text:
Talk:Albert II of Germany

Magnaminious
Why is he called that? The article does not make it clear. 2A00:23C5:E0A0:8300:34B7:61F0:4224:182A (talk) 08:25, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Untitled
This guy appears quite fantastically looking like a cross-dresser. Good. good.

Why is Albert II, who was Emperor Elect, and was King of Hungary and Bohemia, entered in Wikipedia as a king of "Germany"? - Nunh-huh 22:24, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * hm this is indeed strange. shouldn´t this article be Albert II, Holy Roman Emperor considering "Germany" as such didn´t exist back then...? Antares911 19:14, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Albert was neither Emperor Elect nor Holy Roman Emperor. Albert II, King of the Romans would be appropriate, but his title was only "King of Germany" or "King of the Romans" - he was not Emperor or Emperor-Elect.  THe title of "Emperor-Elect" was first used by Maximilian I. john k 19:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW, Germany most certainly did exist back then, and Albert II was most certainly its king. It was one of the three component monarchies of the Holy Roman Empire, along with the Kingdom of Italy and the Kingdom of Burgundy. john k 19:17, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

 * In several sources and also in documents of his own era, he is called, and he himself calls himself, "Albert, king of Romans" - "rex Romanorum". This makes Albert, Roman King, Albert of Holy Roman Empire, Albert, King of Romans and even Albert, German King (Philip, rex Teutonicum...) quite acceptable names for the article. Shilkanni 14:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

If people are unhappy with his roman or german title or if a precise one cannot be agreed upon, then this guy could go under name Albert I of Hungary. Shilkanni 14:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

 * but his name was Albrecht - not Albert -- Hartmann Schedel  Prost 12:12, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Regnal names get translated. Albert is the English equivalent.
 * And "king of the Romans" and "king of Germany" are synonmous. Officially they styled themselves as "king of the Romans" but in international correspondence and chronicles "king of Germany" would also be used.--MacX85 (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: The Middle Ages
— Assignment last updated by Nickthill10 (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Albert II of Germany


text:
Talk:Stamp Act 1765

Article name
Shouldn't this be moved to Stamp Act, 1765 or some such? There were several Stamp Acts in Britain as the Inland Revenue website attests]. Other Commonwealth countries had their own ones too and the concept of passing a law to impose duties is pretty common. adamsan 22:49, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

You have a point. The title of this article reveals a US-centric viewpoint. I would support moving this to a more specific name, BUT... you would need a disambig page at Stamp Act to list all the acts, and all of this would ONLY be useful IF there ARE any other Stamp Act of xxx articles. --Bill W. Smith, Jr. 03:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

tax difference source(s)
Would someone document the source for the taxation difference between the English and the colonists? SLM —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.56.63.190 (talk • contribs).

Vandalism
"1765 Stamp Act HEELP i dont understand! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.68.110.164 (talk) 20:46, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

repeal?
Why does the section on protest/repeal not talk about the repeal? something should be done about that, and unfortunately, I do not know enough about the subject to do it myself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.113.219.59 (talk • contribs). hey this is for old people —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.5.142.127 (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

edit
Some idiot changed the page and i do not know what was there to begin with. Would whoever wrote this page please restore it to its original form? (note) i tried to guess at what it should have been, but I may be wrong Beefpelican 21:37, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Major Revision (9-24-2007)
The main effect of the changes are obviously more detail and the addition of sources and footnotes. The final "Later Effects" section of the article still needs to be rewritten and expanded on, and I intend to do that at some point. The only place that I am aware of where I changed the actual substance of the previous article involved the purpose of the Stamp Act -- I attempted to make it clear that while the British debt had been a prime factor in general British policy, the funds from the Stamp Act were to be earmarked strictly for expenses of the British military in America. —Preceding unsigned comment added by North Shoreman (talk • contribs) 15:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Wow, nice expansion! I'll try to copyedit and clean up the article, and maybe we can bring it to GA/FA status. Nishkid64 (talk) 00:39, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Merger Involving Stamp Act Congress
After over a month only two opposing opinions have been expressed nd there have been no comments in almost four weeks. Closed w/oconsensus to merge. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Oppose
The current article on the Stamp Act, considering the importance of the subject and WP:Article size, is of an appropriate size. The existing section on the Stamp Act Congress is an integral part of the existing article. The editor who tagged this section for elimination has provided no justification for his actions. If any changes are warranted, it would makes much more sense to eliminate the short, poorly written, largely undocumented, and non-encyclopedic article on the Stamp Act Congress and merge it into the Stamp Act main article. WP:MERGE makes this case when it says, “If a page is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic. For instance, parents or children of a celebrity who are otherwise unremarkable are generally covered in a section of the article on the celebrity, and can be merged there.” Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Support
This section and the Stamp Act Congress article concern the identical subject. The Stamp Act Congress article has content which is not in this article and this article contains content which is not in the Stamp Act Congress article. The Stamp Act Congress article would substantially benefit from the addition of content from this article. With the additional of this additional content the Stamp Act Congress would become a substantial article. To avoid needless duplication of content the size of the section in this article could be reduced. BradMajors (talk) 07:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

 * The only thing in the Stamp Act Congress not in the main article is a complete list of delegates. This can easily be added to the main article without any significant increase in size, and the balance of the Congress article can simply be made into a "redirect" page.  Snce you have not made an argument that the Stamp Act article, by Wikipedia standards, is too long, there is no reason why material needs to be removed from it.  You have also not made the case about why a separate article is even needed for the Congress when all of the material from that article can easily be included in the reasonably sized main article. Keeping the article "as is" helps to provide a more complete picture of American reaction to the Stamp Act-- the Congress section provides needed context and contrast to the immediately preceding section "Protest in the streets". Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 11:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

 * No argument is being made that the article should be split based upon the current size of this article. Also, the Stamp Act Congress article is of substantial size and content and there is no reason it should be eliminated based upon its size.  A common technique used when two articles discuss the same topic is for one article to be the "main" article and the referring article to contain a summary of the "main" article. BradMajors (talk) 04:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

 * You need to make it clear exactly what your goal is here. The "common technique" you refer to has nothing to do with WP:MERGE and everything to do with WP:SUMMARY. You have proposed a merge -- this would involve elimination of the entire section.  If this is not your goal, then the merge tag should be removed IMMEDIATELY. if this IS your goal, then defend it. What you still fail to make the case for is why ANYTHING should be removed from the current article. You now acknowledge that this has nothing to do with size.

 * I have referred you to WP:SUMMARY before. In the section titled “Rationale” this article provides:

 * “The length of a given Wikipedia entry tends to grow as people add information to it. This cannot go on forever: very long entries would cause problems. So we must move information out of entries periodically. This information should not be removed from Wikipedia: that would defeat the purpose of the contributions. So we must create new entries to hold the excised information."

 * Since size is NOT the issue, it seems clear based on the above that if the Congress article did not already exist, there would be no reason for creating it. The issue that needs to be addressed, since you decided to make a point of it, is whether maintaining that article serves any real purpose.  As I stated earlier and you have not contested, there is only a small amount of material in the Congress article that is not already in the main article. WP:MERGE clearly states as a reason to merge is when “There are two or more pages on exactly the same subject and having the same scope.”  This is exactly the situation we face here-- there is no reason for a separate article since ALL of the substance from that article can be incorporated into the main article -- the only thing not in the main article is the list of delegates.  You said earlier “ To avoid needless duplication of content the size of the section in this article could be reduced.”  In fact, the easiest way to “avoid needless duplication” is to eliminate the article Stamp Act Congress in its entirety. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Opposition to Proposed Merger Involving Sons of Liberty
After over a month only two opposing opinions have been expressed nd there have been no comments in almost four weeks. Closed w/oconsensus to merge. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:08, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

The current article on the Stamp Act, considering the importance of the subject and WP:Article size, is of an appropriate size. The editor tagging this section wants to do an end run around the guidelines of WP:Summary style (which the editor opposes) in which the main article (Stamp Act) would retain some of the substance of the sub-article (Son’s of Liberty). WP:MERGE contains four reasons why a merge should be contemplated -- none of them apply to this situation. It seems with all the room there is for improvement on the various articles relating to the origins of the American Revolution (including the article on the Son's of Liberty) that editors could make a better use of their time than by trying to dismantle this well-written, well-researched article (which I largely wrote). Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 02:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

 * No explanation was offered at the time that this proposed merger was made, and no response has been made to my above objections even though the editor involved has responded to the other proposed merger. I will remove the proposed merger in the near future unless someone cares to defend the merger proposal. In particular, which of the four conditions for merger exist.Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 13:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Origin of Sons of Liberty
The article uses one citation which states that the use of "Sons of Liberty" precedes 1765, while I am aware of more than one reliable source which states that the use of "Sons of Liberty" started after February 1765. BradMajors (talk) 04:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

 * You misstate the issue. The Pauline Maier reference addresses the use of “sons of liberty” as a generic term -- I have now eliminated the capital letters to make this consistent.  You had attempted to delete this fully sourced statement, and I have further clarified its accuracy by expanding the footnote information.

 * You had replaced the deletion with the following claim, “The term "Sons of Liberty" originated with with Barre's speech in February 1765.” You referenced this to page 130 in the Miller book.  In fact, Miller DOES NOT say that the term originated with Barre, but rather says that Barre’s use of the term led to groups adopting this name.  Barre’s use of the  term was not original but, as Maier also notes, used by him “in the same rhetorical, descriptive sense” that was already common in the colonies.  I have put the Miller information back in the article (as I had invited you to do) using the proper context. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

 * New version of the article in relation to "Sons of Liberty" is much improved. No objection to the new version. BradMajors (talk) 16:33, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Edits of 3-15-2008
Material had been changed with the edit summary "I believe the "necessity" of that tax was - shall we say - hotly contested, and in fact was what makes the Act notable at all." However the reference to necessity was not intended to be to the Stamp Act, but to the overall economic program of which the Stamp Act was just a part. The Stamp Act was not intended, as the edit sugested, to "alleviate Britain’s greatly increased national debt" but to pay for current and future expenses. While the body of the article makes this clear, the lede did not so I have rewritten it so that the point cannot be missed.

I removed the reference to an increased border size because I'm not sure it is accurate. The border size between French Canada and British North America had been totally eliminated, and I don't think that this reduction was offset by new borders that the British had acquired. In any event, the article is fully sourced and the sources used don't make the claim that total border area was a separate factor from the total size of the newly acquired. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 15:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Documentation -- "citation needed" tags placed by Hmains
I wrote most of the article and most of the tags added were unwarranted. I followed the practice of placing footnotes used in most works of history and allowed by WikiProject Military history/Style guide which provides, "A single footnote may be used to provide citations for any amount of material; while they typically apply to one or a few sentences, they may also cover entire paragraphs or sections of text." All of the cited sentences, except for the ones in the conclusion of the article, are supported by the next footnote in the text. I did add one duplicate footnote where the cite is actually contained in a following paragraph -- I assume that occurred because another editor split my original paragraph in two. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 22:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

 * You may wish to re-read the guideline you are referring to, as quotations need direct citations, not just paragraph citations (see WP:MILMOS). The guideline also states "In general, any statement for which a citation has been explicitly requested by another editor should be provided with one as well". I haven't looked in detail at which statements were flagged with the tag, but the editor that added the tags may wish to confirm whether or not they are happy with paragraph citations in each case. Regards. Road Wizard (talk) 22:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I did re-read the section WP:MILMOS. This main section tells us WHAT to footnote, and the section I quoted shows HOW to do it.  The section you refer to states:

 * The nature of historical material requires that articles be thoroughly—even exhaustively—cited. At a minimum, the following all require direct citation:
 * 1.	Direct quotations of outside material
 * 2.	Paraphrasing or other borrowing of ideas from an outside source
 * 3.	Controversial or disputed statements
 * 4.	Subjective or qualitative judgements
 * 5.	Numerical quantities or statistics

 * Direct quotations are grouped together with four other types of material that require “direct citation”, with paraphrasing probably being the most common. There is no indication that I am aware of that “direct citation” somehow means citation immediately after a sentence (or immediately after the quote if it’s in the middle of the sentence). Nor is there any indication in the MOS that “direct quotations” should be treated differently than “paraphrasing”.  In the two instances where quotes are used the footnoting would be adequate for any professional publication.

 * You quote, "In general, any statement for which a citation has been explicitly requested by another editor should be provided with one as well." Well, in this case the citations were already there.  If the editor in question has any questions about the accuracy of the cites I will be glad to discuss them further. Tom (North Shoreman) (talk) 23:53, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

 * You may wish to look at Wikipedia:Citing sources: "You should always add a citation when quoting published material, and the citation should be placed directly after (or just before) the quotation, which should be enclosed within double quotation marks".
 * While the current method of footnoting would be adequate for "any professional publication", you have to remember that such publications cannot be edited by any member of the public. Given the ease with which random editors can add spurious claims into an already sourced paragraph it is sometimes necessary to have citations directly after quotations and statements of a questionable nature. Road Wizard (talk) 00:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

"Continental paper money"
This expression appears in the lede, with no wlink or no further reference in the body (except perhaps a reference to 'hard money' in some block text). Could we have a wikilink please? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 17:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Impact on colonial economy compared to monetary values today
Although this should not be placed in the article itself, as a note to the impact on which these stamps would have had on the colonial economy, it may be stated using inflation templates, what the equivalent costs of these duties would be in today's English pound sterling to gauge this law's effect on the prices of items in that day.

The English pound sterling then consisted of 240 pence (the British penny was then abbreviated "d"), which was then broken into smaller denominations, including the shilling, which was 1/20 of a pound sterling, which consisted of 12d.

The major increments of English money of that day are shown below with their modern-day equivalents:

Bill S. (talk) 07:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
 * 1d = £0
 * 1s = £0
 * £1 = £0

Vandalism
For unknown reasons, this article invites more than the usual share of vandalism. Given the nature of the topic, this article may invite a disproportionate number of middle-school or elementary-school visitors who may find it amusing to make inappropriate modifications. I suspect, the only way to solve this problem is a long-term partial lock, blocking novices and anonymous edits. Alex.deWitte (talk) 23:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

local bias
This article says nothing about the impact of the act in colonies outside the present United States, specifically the Caribbean colonies (which were also affected), and the colonies now part of Canada. This would include economic and political consequences to the act, and reaction to the protests in the Thirteen.  Magic ♪piano 15:01, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
 * the economic impact was small everywhere because the tax was quite small. The principle, however, was quite large. Rjensen (talk) 04:56, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The (intended) economic impact of the taxes may have been small, but that of the protest activity was not. Trade dropped off substantially due to the non-importation agreements, and was of serious concern to West Indies interests, who depended on North American trade for basics like food and lumber.  American ships were under threat (or rumored threat) of seizure if they put into a port with unstamped papers. These forces were among those that made the (ultimately successful economic) case for repeal.  Magic ♪piano 23:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

quote by Samuel Adams
I'm wondering if the following quote by Samuel Adams really belongs to this article:
 * For if our Trade may be taxed why not our Lands? Why not the Produce of our Lands & every thing we possess or make use of? This we apprehend annihilates our Charter Right to govern & tax ourselves – It strikes our British Privileges, which as we have never forfeited them, we hold in common with our Fellow Subjects who are Natives of Britain: If Taxes are laid upon us in any shape without our having a legal Representation where they are laid, are we not reduced from the Character of free Subjects to the miserable State of tributary Slaves

For one thing, he wrote this about the Sugar Act in May 1764, nearly a year before the Stamp Act was voted. Also, the quote starts with "for if our trade may be taxed", which disconnects the quote from the Stamp Act since it was not a tax on trade.

In fact, the whole passage that starts with "Debate in the colonies over the Stamp Act had actually begun in the spring of 1764" and ends with "Although the content of the messages varied, they all emphasized that taxation of the colonies without colonial assent was a violation of their rights." seems out of place. It deals with events that predate the Stamp Act, even though it is in the "Political responses" section.

I think it should be moved to a more relevant article, or into the Background section, though in my opinion the paragraph about taxation and representation in the Background section is sufficient as it is. LeCid (talk) 21:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it explains Adams' position before the specific stamp act came up--and shows he did not change positions. Rjensen (talk) 21:43, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Declaratory Act
Not an expert on this, but the article as it stands now states, "Secretary of State Henry Conway introduced the Declaratory Act, which affirmed the right of Parliament to tax the colonies, '...in all cases whatsoever'..." According to Barbara Tuchman in The March of Folly (1984) the Declaratory Act "...did not mention taxation, the whole point of the dispute." Charles Yorke, Attorny General of Great Britain, moved to insert "in cases of taxation," but was overruled, the sentiment being that "in all cases whatsoever" covered taxation. (p. 165) Seems to contradict what is said here.

The Stamp Act
august body the Parliament of Great Britain. II.That His Majesty's liege subjects in these colonies, are entitled to all the inherent rights and liberties of his natural born subjects within the kingdom of Great-Britain. III.That it is inseparably essential to the freedom of a people, and the undoubted right of Englishmen, that no taxes be imposed on them, but with their own consent, given personally, or by their representatives. IV.That the people of these colonies are not, and from their local circumstances cannot be, represented in the House of Commons in Great-Britain. V.That the only representatives of the people of these colonies, are persons chosen therein by themselves, and that no taxes ever have been, or can be constitutionally imposed on them, but by their respective legislatures. VI.That all supplies to the Crown, being free gifts of the people, it is unreasonable and inconsistent with the principles and spirit of the British Constitution, for the people of Great-Britain to grant to His Majesty the property of the colonists. VII.That trial by jury is the inherent and invaluable right of every British subject in these colonies. VIII.That the late Act of Parliament, entitled, An Act for granting and applying certain Stamp Duties, and other Duties, in the British colonies and plantations in America, etc., by imposing taxes on the inhabitants of these colonies, and the said Act, and several other Acts, by extending the jurisdiction of the courts of Admiralty beyond its ancient limits, have a manifest tendency to subvert the rights and liberties of the colonists. IX.That the duties imposed by several late Acts of Parliament, from the peculiar circumstances of these colonies, will be extremely burthensome and grievous; and from the scarcity of specie, the payment of them absolutely impracticable. X.That as the profits of the trade of these colonies ultimately center in Great-Britain, to pay for the manufactures which they are obliged to take from thence, they eventually contribute very largely to all supplies granted there to the Crown. XI.That the restrictions imposed by several late Acts of Parliament, on the trade of these colonies, will render them unable to purchase the manufactures of Great-Britain. XII.That the increase, prosperity, and happiness of these colonies, depend on the full and free enjoyment of their rights and liberties, and an intercourse with Great-Britain mutually affectionate and advantageous. XIII.That it is the right of the British subjects in these colonies, to petition the King, Or either House of Parliament.

Lastly, That it is the indispensable duty of these colonies, to the best of sovereigns, to the mother country, and to themselves, to endeavour by a loyal and dutiful address to his Majesty, and humble applications to both Houses of Parliament, to procure the repeal of the Act for granting and applying certain stamp duties, of all clauses of any other Acts of Parliament, whereby the jurisdiction of the Admiralty is extended as aforesaid, and of the other late Acts for the restriction of American commerce.

– "Resolutions of the Stamp Act Congress," 1765

Taxation in this manner and the Quartering Act (which required the American colonies to provide food and shelter for British troops) were soundly thrashed in colonial assemblies. From Patrick Henry in Virginia to James Otis in Massachusetts, Americans voiced their protest. A Stamp Act Congress was convened in the colonies to decide what to do.

The colonists put their words into action and enacted widespread boycotts of British goods. Radical groups such as the Sons and Daughters of Liberty did not hesitate to harass tax collectors or publish the names of those who did not comply with the boycotts.

Soon, the pressure on Parliament by business-starved British merchants was too great to bear. The Stamp Act was repealed the following year.

The crisis was over, but the uneasy peace did not last long. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.2.100.120 (talk) 04:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

 * This is a page for the discussion of RS's for the improvement of the article. Your post has no point in this regard - asking an Administrator to 'hat' this post, please - thanks. HammerFilmFan (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 06:52, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Under Other Colonies, including one of the only images regarding the stamp act would be a helpful illustration of the sentiment of the time. Painted in 1765 by colonial colonial artist Jeremiah Theus in Charleston South Carolina. Elizabeth Theus 1742-1797, age 23, first child of Theus and Elizabeth Shaumloffel wearing a musket & powder horn crown and colonial militia outfit, ready to fight for freedom. Inspired by the Stamp act and an old English Broadside "The Resolution of the Women of London to the Parliament" urging men to go to war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Collectionsbalsorano (talk • contribs) 02:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 March 2022
2600:6C50:7A7F:F63F:5869:2817:D568:EAA5 (talk) 00:06, 2 March 2022 (UTC) George Washington
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 00:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2023
Change "A majority considered it a violation of their rights as Englishmen to be taxed without their consent" to "A majority considered it a violation of their rights as Englishmen not to be taxed without their consent". Danielsimonsdk (talk) 11:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Not done, the current wording is correct in my view. You are suggesting a double-negative (on without), which flips the meaning. -- Mvqr (talk) 11:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Stamp Act 1765


text:
Uakari

Uakari is the common name for the New World monkeys of the genus Cacajao. Both the English and scientific names are believed to have originated from indigenous languages.

The uakaris are unusual among New World monkeys in that the tail length (15–18 cm) is substantially less than their head and body length (40–45 cm). Their bodies are covered with long, loose hair but their heads are bald. They have almost no subcutaneous fat, so their bald faces appear almost skull-like. Like their closest relatives the saki monkeys, they have projecting lower incisors. These monkeys have the most striking red facial skin of any primate. Females choose their mates based on how red the male's face is. Evidence suggests that the red facial coloration reflects the health of the primate.

The four species of uakari currently recognized are all found in the north-western Amazon basin. The bald uakari, remarkable for its brilliant scarlet complexion, is found north of the Amazon River, and south of the Japurá River in the Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve. The black-headed uakari is found north of the Amazon and south of the Rio Negro. The Neblina uakari is found north of the Rio Negro, west of the Rio Marauiá and east of the Casiquiare canal. The Aracá uakari is currently known only from the Rio Curuduri basin.

They have been observed both in small groups and in larger troops of up to 100. When traveling through the forest they move in the lower branches of the trees, though when foraging they also go up to the canopy. They mostly eat fruit, and unlike other Neotropical frugivores will consume a large amount of unripe fruit for which they have specialised dentition. They also eat flowers, seeds, invertebrates, buds and leaves.

Uakari are found in neotropical Amazon flooded or riparian forests, including Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela.

A phylogeographic reconstruction found that the concestor of living uakari dates to 1.7 million years ago, in the Solimões River, whence they spread and diversified following intermittent river rearrangements.

Species
There are four species in this genus:
 * Genus Cacajao
 * Bald uakari or red uakari, C. calvus
 * Cacajao calvus calvus
 * Cacajao calvus ucayalii
 * Cacajao calvus rubicundus
 * Cacajao calvus novaesi
 * Black-headed uakari species group
 * Golden-backed or black-headed uakari, Cacajao melanocephalus
 * Aracá uakari, Cacajao ayresi*
 * Neblina uakari, Cacajao hosomi*

In 2014 Ferrari et al. proposed an alternative taxonomy for the C. melanocephalus group which recognizes the Aracá uakari as a subspecies of the golden-backed uakari, and also recognized Cacajao ouakary as a separate species, whereas current consensus is that C. ouakary is a junior synonym of C. melanocephalus. This revision is not universally accepted.

title: Uakari