text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Rex071404/Proposed decision

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or vote to abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority yea vote will be enacted.
 * Items that receive a majority nay vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority yea or nay vote will be open to possible amendment by any arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.
 * Items that receive a majority abstentions will need to go through an amendment process and be re-voted on once.

Conditional votes for, against, or to abstain should be explained by the arbitrator in parenthesis after his time-stamped signature. For example, an arbitrator can state that he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were enacted.

Proposed temporary orders
1) As Rex071404 has continued to engage in personal attacks following the commencement of Arbitration proceedings, a ban on editing any article other than the pages concerning this Arbitration case and his user and user talk pages is imposed pending a final decision in this matter.

 * Yea:
 * James F. (talk) 14:09, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC) Yes, on further thought, too broad. James F. (talk) 15:58, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * User:Neutrality and the rest of the aggressive partisans on the other side would also have to be banned for this to be fair. Fred Bauder 14:13, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC). In addition it is too broad Fred Bauder 04:55, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 09:37, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 16:31, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:58, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:
 * Martin 12:40, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC) (unsure)

2) Rex071404 is banned from editing the pages John Kerry; John Kerry presidential campaign, 2004; and John Kerry VVAW controversy until the final decision is made in this matter. This is based on his churning of the article over petty matters as well as repeated efforts to inject a hypercritical point of view as illustrated by these edits:, , ; , ,  and

 * Yea:
 * Fred Bauder 04:55, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 09:37, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 12:40, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 16:31, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:58, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Proposed principles
1) Personal attacks are not permitted on Wikipedia, see No personal attacks.

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 1:
 * Fred Bauder 11:56, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:25, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 03:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 17:56, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 1:

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 1:

2) Wikipedia is not a vehicle for political advocacy or propaganda, see What Wikipedia is not which states that Wikipedia articles are not to used for "Propaganda or advocacy of any kind".

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 2:
 * Fred Bauder 11:56, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:25, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 03:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 17:56, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 2:

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 2:

3) An encyclopedia article is a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject, not a complete exposition of all possible details.

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 3:
 * Fred Bauder 12:57, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:25, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 03:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC) - To quote myself from a simliar consideration in the Avala case - To do otherwise would be an invitation for crackpots and POV pushers.

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 3:
 * While technically correct this statement is misleading since we do want a great deal of detail, just not all in the same article (which should be a summary but subtopics should lead to other summaries and so on). mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 17:56, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) (I think this is a matter for the community to decide, and while it's been heavily discussed, I'm not aware of any conclusion having been reached that would support all of the above)

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 3:

3.5) An encyclopedia article is not a complete exposition of all possible details regarding its subject.

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 3.5:

 * Martin 15:19, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC) (ahem, apologies for the broken proposal here previously).
 * James F. (talk) 02:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (I could have sworn the two priciples were different, at first)
 * This wording is also acceptable, for the same reasons as above. →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 3.5:

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 3.5:

4) The Arbitration Committee may issue a valid decree which requires that editing of the content of a Wikipedia article conform to Wikipedia policies including those set forth in What Wikipedia is not. This power does not extend to determining the content of the article merely to requiring that editing of the article conform to Wikipedia guidelines. Specific content is the responsibility of the Wikipedia editors who edit the article.

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 4:
 * Fred Bauder 11:45, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 17:34, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 17:56, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC) (we're allowed to issue decrees. This type of decree seems fine to me)
 * James F. (talk) 13:55, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 4:
 * Mav seems confused about the wording, and so am I. Further - I don't see what the point in issuing a decree telling people to follow our guidelines does -- they *are* expected to follow our guideines, regardless of whether or not the arbcom specifically tells them to. →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 4:
 * Huh? This sounds like a power grab but I'm not sure due to the confusing wording. mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

5) Wikipedia editors are expected to be courteous and respectful towards other editors, especially those they may have a dispute with, see Wikiquette which specifially admonishes editors to "Recognize your own biases and keep them in check."

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 5:
 * Fred Bauder 13:17, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 22:25, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:55, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 5:

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 5:

6) Regardless of the ratio of editing participants who advocate particular points of view regarding a matter, Wikipedia's Neutral point of view policy mandates that coverage of points of view in an article reflect the societal significance of those points of view, not the variable perspectives and ratio of Wikipedia editors.

 * Arbitrator votes for proposed principle 6:
 * Fred Bauder 15:16, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * Arbitrator votes against proposed principle 6:
 * Martin 15:24, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC) Should bias be corrected by us trying to write from a broad perspective, or by recruiting editors from broader backgrounds? I don't believe the NPOV policy mandates (or prohibits) the first alternative.
 * James F. (talk) 02:27, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Agree with Martin.)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC) - For the same reasons I gave in proposed principle #3.

 * Arbitrator abstains regarding proposed principle 6:

John Kerry article
1) User Rex071404 and others including the complaining witnesses, Neutrality, Wolfman, and JamesMLane have in the heat of the US Presidential election focused on the article John Kerry and carried the issues of the campaign into the encyclopedia article in detail. See and
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:36, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)
 * the Epopt 03:15, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:59, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:52, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:10, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 05:21, Sep 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Discourtesy
2) User Rex071404 has in his conversations on the talk page of John Kerry and related articles and in his edit summaries been discourteous toward other editors which who he was in dispute.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:21, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:59, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:52, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:10, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 13:11, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Edits by User Bkonrad
3) User Bkonrad has made several edits which Rex071404 complains of, and . In the first Bkonrad is somewhat insulting, characterizing one of Rex071404's logical theories as "preposterous nonsense"; the second is unobjectionable. The complaints against Bkonrad's edits in Requests for arbitration/Rex071404/Evidence are not linked to specific edits and cannot be fully evaluated but do seem to be somewhat lacking in Wikiquette.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:14, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 13:59, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:52, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:10, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 13:11, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Systemic imbalance
4) Due to the literary nature of Wikipedia, participation in Wikipedia editing to a certain extent selects for a liberal viewpoint with the result that supporters of George W. Bush such as Rex071404 tend to be greatly outnumbered by supporters of John Kerry, see David Brooks NY Times, 9-11-04
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:49, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Martin 15:14, 12 Sep 2004 (UTC) While I suspect a numerical imbalance exists, I believe the international nature of Wikipedia is likely to be a greater cause of this imbalance.
 * James F. (talk) 02:30, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Again, agree with Martin)
 * →Raul654 13:11, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC) - agree with Martin.
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Selection for liberal viewpoint
4.1) Participation in Wikipedia editing to a certain extent selects for a liberal viewpoint with the result that supporters of George W. Bush such as Rex071404 tend to be greatly outnumbered by supporters of John Kerry, see David Brooks NY Times, 9-11-04
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:30, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:30, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (I suppose that this will do.)
 * →Raul654 13:11, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Martin 13:14, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC) ("liberal" in US terms, perhaps, but not in world terms. AFAICT)

 * Abstain:
 * I'm not comfortable with saying that. mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Feelings of being ganged up on
5) Rex071404 felt that he was out-numbered and ganged-up on as he edited the article John Kerry by supporters of John Kerry who were unfairly editing the article to minimize the point of view he was advocating and maximize their point of view.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:30, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:30, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 13:14, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC) (though appearances can be deceptive)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:03, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Amen, Martin.)
 * →Raul654 13:11, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Possible motivation of opponents
6) The complaining witnesses in this matter, because of their numerical majority, may have felt that Rex071404 did not represent a point of view which had a magnitude of importance equal to theirs, despite its societal significance.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:30, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Martin 13:14, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC) ("may have felt"? Anything's possible.)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) - agree with Martin
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:
 * James F. (talk) 02:30, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Note: I am slightly unsure of this so have moved to Abstain for the time being; if I was to vote for this, it would be on the understanding that this was not a criticism of the complaining witnesses James F. (talk) 23:49, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC))
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:03, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC) (Agree with James F. to a certain extent -- I think it might be a reasonable criticism, but it's not something I think the AC should 'officially' criticize)

7) Rex071404 habitually and aggressively edits Wikipedia articles which relate to the politics of the United States from a partisan point of view, see Talk:Stolen Honor and its archive Talk:Stolen Honor/Archive.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 16:15, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:03, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Difficulties in reaching agreement
8) It has with respect to a number of articles which concern the politics of the United States proven impossible for many editors to reach agreements with Rex071404 despite exhaustive attempts to negotiate.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 16:15, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:03, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

User:216.153.214.94
8) During the course of arbitration Rex071404 ceased editing under that user name and began editing as User:216.153.214.94. See page history of Dedham, Massachusetts

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 11:21, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 15:10, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Edit war at Dedham, Massachusetts
9) Editing as User:216.153.214.94, Rex071404 has engaged in a protracted edit war at Dedham, Massachusetts in which User:Antaeus Feldspar, User:AlistairMcMillan, User:Ambi, User:RickK, User:Gamaliel, User:Jerzy and User:Violetriga have participated. This edit war originated in a dispute between Rex071404 and Antaeus Feldspar respecting this content which Rex071404 repeated inserted into the article.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 11:54, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 15:14, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Issue of edit war and taunting
10) The edit war at Dedham, Massachusetts continued to be over insertion of the same paragraph and was at times accompanied by taunting as in this edit by Violetriga and this edit by Ambi.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Jwrosenzweig 15:13, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Were the edit summaries the best thing to say? No.  But are they "taunts"? Certainly not.  And I don't think we need punish every sign of frustration with a user if that user is disrespecting policy by repetitive reversion, and if the AC has dragged its feet on finishing a case, nay, two cases, brought against him.)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) (as jwros)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) - agree with Jw
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

 * Comment:
 * Sorry but can I just say that it wasn't a taunt but an ironic joke that the 80th (or so) revert had happened, with multiple people reverting the edits of one user that didn't get the message. It should not have broken the three revert rule, hence my request for protection. violet/riga (t) 17:49, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Retaliatory vandalism
11) Editing anonymously as User:216.153.214.94 retaliated by engaging in vandalism, blanking an opponent's (Violetriga's) home page with the comment, "delete vandal's home page". User:Violetriga is a well-established Wikipedia user but participated in the edit war at Dedham, Massachusetts.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 11:21, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 15:15, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) (noting, though, that the final remark is a mild rebuke -- after all, there seems to have been consensus, given the number of editors reverting Rex)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Justification of reversion by reference to arbitration
12) Following his [probably initial] reversion removing the insertion of the disputed material by Rex071404, Antaeus Feldspar justifies it by questioning not only its relevance to Dedham, Massachusetts but also justifies the reversion by linking "the situation" to Rex071404's arbitration case.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:25, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 15:17, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Reluctantly...I think it wise not to make such a link, but again, I think it is somewhat understandable.)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) (too petty to comment)

 * Abstain:

Problems with negotiation
13) Discussion on Talk:Dedham, Massachusetts by Rex071404 and Antaeus Feldspar was quite unproductive with much repeating of entrenched positions. It was only when a uninvolved party [[User:Netoholic] makes this suggestion that some sense of possible alternatives to polarized versions was inserted into the discussion.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Yay for Netoholic!)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Not sure. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) - Ditto
 * Define 'unproductive' mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Repeating established postions over and over without doing any additional research or suggesting any alternatives which could potentially satisfy both parties to the dispute. Fred Bauder 04:50, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

Relevance of book to dispute
14) Although there is a book A New England Town: The First Hundred Years : Dedham, Massachusetts, 1636-1736 (Norton Essays in American History) ISBN 0393954595 which concerns the early history of the town which Rex071404 repeatedly refers to and which is available used for about $6.00 including postage, the edits to the article show no sign that either he or the other participants in the edit war consulted or used any material from it or that any material in the book is relevant to either of the polarized versions of the article.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) (but I've not read the book either, so how can I be sure?)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Not sure. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Content issues are beyond our jurisdiction. mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Relevance of internet link cited
15) There is some material available on the internet which relates to church-state matters with respect to Dedham, Massachussets. It concerns Massachusetts litigation regarding appointment of the parish minister by the town of Dedham in contradition to the appointment desired by church members . However, despite being the link incorporated by Rex071404 into the material he desired to insert, it contains no material which relates generally to the basis for the establishment clause in the United States Constitution. It was Antaeus Feldspar's contention that he had included the material from this source in the article.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Not sure. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Problems with researching
16) Considering the findings above which relate to editing of Dedham, Massachusetts, it is apparent that Rex071404 is unable or unwilling to engage in research with respect to established knowledge at a level of competance adequate for contributing productively to Wikipedia as he cites sources which he has not consulted (at least recently) or which contain information which differ from the information which he claims they support.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Weak aye. mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Not sure. James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

bulldog tenditiousness
17) Rex071404's problems with understanding and using references are compounded by bulldog tenditiousness which result in revert wars of such an egregious intensity that it results in recruitment of other editors who jump in to assist Rex071404's opponents creating a general uproar, see the edit history of Dedham, Massachusetts and John Kerry.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:31, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Petty offenses
18) In reaction to Rex071404 a number of those who engaged in disputes with him and participated in the arbitration have committed various petty offenses, some of which are mentioned in other proposed findings of fact including personal attacks, taunting of Rex071404, aspersions on his honesty and tag team reverting, see page history of Dedham, Massachusetts. Rex071404, in turn, has recipricated.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:59, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:29, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Proposed decision
1) Rex071404's cross-complaint that the complaining witnesses "abused the Wiki process by bringing an Arbitration complaint against Rex071404 prior to exhausting attempts at dialog, so as to silence the one strong dissenting voice on John Kerry" is without merit. There were extensive efforts to engage in dialog. There is a great deal of evidence of distress on the part of the complaining witnesses due to the conflict but not of intent to silence Rex071404.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:11, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:48, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

2) It is not possible for the Arbitration committee to deal with Rex071404's cross-complaint that "Neutrality in particular, in light of his knowledge of and familiarity with Wiki methods, could easily have taken a less confrontational approach with me than he has". It is true of all Wikipedia users that they could do better.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:11, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:48, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

3) No penalties shall attach to the various "petty offenses" which parties to this matter committed during the course of this protracted dispute. This is partially due to contraints of time and energy and partially in response to recognition that the parties mutually provoked one another.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

Remedies
1) Rex071404 and the users who have been involved with him in the controversy regarding the editing of the article John Kerry are encouraged to restore that article to an encyclopedia article which sets forth John Kerry's biography and background, replacing detailed blow-by-blow accounts of current affairs which relate to the 2004 Presidential election campaign with brief summaries along with links to particular controversies which have arisen during the campaign.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 11:35, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:09, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC) (I don't think mav's objection makes the above remedy unworkable -- it's merely additional good advice)

 * Nay:
 * Move the detailed content to appropriately named daughter articles and leave summaries at John Kerry. This has already been done for his campaign article. mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree with Mav. James F. (talk) 14:01, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) It is not our job to determine article content.

 * Abstain:

1.5) Rex071404 and the users who have been involved with him in the controversy regarding the editing of the article John Kerry are encouraged to restore that article to an encyclopedia article which sets forth John Kerry's biography and background, free from blow-by-blow accounts of current affairs which relate to the 2004 Presidential election campaign. The exact manner by which this takes place is a matter for the editors of the article to decide.

 * Aye:
 * Martin 01:09, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 02:11, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 02:55, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) It is not our job to determine article content.
 * Agree. mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

2) Rex071404, Bkonrad and others who have committed petty offenses are admonished to consult Wikiquette and to conform their edits to that standard.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:24, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 14:01, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:09, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:36, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

3) Rex071404 is banned from editing Wikipedia articles which concern United States politics.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 16:22, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:06, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Too strong. James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:
 * Martin 15:06, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

3) Rex071404 is banned for 4 months from editing Wikipedia articles which concern United States politics.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 14:49, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Presumably this will take place, as normal, after any ban, below. James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:06, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:33, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

4) Rex071404 is banned from reverting any article at any time for one year.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:33, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Prefer this to
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Too strong(?) James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * too long and what about legit reverts, such as the removal of vandalism? mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

4.1) Rex071404 is banned from reverting any article for six months.

 * Aye:
 * James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:06, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 00:18, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:33, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC) (Acceptable but prefer 4 above)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Not comfortable with this. mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

5) In view of his demonstrated deficiencies in engaging in and interpreting the results of research Rex071404 is required to cite a relevant authority, either by footnote or by comment embedded in the text, which supports every [disputed] edit he makes.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:06, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) (obviously such footnotes or comments can be removed or moved to Talk in subsequent edits)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:33, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Only if challenged. I added [disputed] mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Nice idea, but I'm not sure that it is workable. James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Enforcement
1) Edits by any user which carry an unreasonable degree of detail into the article, John Kerry, subverting its nature as a general summary of John Kerry's biography and background may be reverted by any other user. Users who repeatedly restore such detailed material which in the opinion of any Wikipedia administrator represent the intrusion of the Presidential campaign of 2004 into the article may be banned from editing the article until after the election. Refusal to respect such a ban shall be grounds for banning the user from Wikipedia until after the election.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 12:05, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * We should not be limiting what people who are not part of this arbitration may do. mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Too broad; outside our mandate. James F. (talk) 15:04, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) Election over now.
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

1.5) Edits by the participants in this matter: Wolfman, JamesMLane, Gamaliel, Gzornenplatz, Lyellin, Neutrality, John Kenney, Bkonrad, Rex071404 and Ambi which carry an unreasonable degree of detail into the article, John Kerry, subverting its nature as a general summary of John Kerry's biography and background may be reverted by any other user. Users who repeatedly restore such detailed material which in the opinion of any Wikipedia administrator represent the intrusion of the Presidential campaign of 2004 into the article may be banned from editing the article until after the election. Refusal to respect such a ban shall be grounds for banning the user from Wikipedia until after the election.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:36, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 16:04, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:54, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) Election over now.

 * Abstain:
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Pointless now mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

2) Edits (including those whose edit summaries offend) by Rex071404 to John Kerry and related articles or their talk pages which contain insulting language directed towards those he views as his political opponents may be removed by any user. Attempts by Rex071404 to revert such removals shall justify a short ban which may be imposed by any sysop.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 13:30, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:04, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 23:54, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 01:05, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

3) Edits by user Rex071404 during the period of his ban to any article which concerns United States politics may be removed by any user.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 16:29, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:08, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * If passed, of course. James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

4) Any sysop may impose a short ban (one day or up to one week for repeat offenses) of Rex071404 should he revert or reinsert any material removed by another user from an article which concerns United States politics during the period of his ban.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 16:29, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 21:08, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

5) This decision shall apply to User:216.153.214.94 and any other username or ip which Rex071404 may utilize.

 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, "may be deemed to be using"? James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:

6) In the event Rex071404 makes an edit which cites no authority or an inappropriate authority it may be removed by any other user.
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:31, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * Don't think that this is workable. James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

7) In the event Rex071404 reverts any edit for any reason any administrator may impose a short ban (a hour to a day for first offenses and up to a week for repeat offenses).
 * Aye:
 * Fred Bauder 15:05, Nov 5, 2004 (UTC)
 * Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig 22:31, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:33, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Nay:

 * Abstain:
 * ... and remove his ability to help fight vandalism? Maybe... James F. (talk) 12:38, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Discussion by arbitrators
Regarding the request for a temporary injunction restricting Rex071404 from editing John Kerry and related articles, I have looked at the history of that page and its talk page and find there is no danger of irreparable harm to Wikipedia should Rex071404 continue to edit the page. I find that, while aggressive, Rex071404 is no more so than the complaining witness, User:Neutrality. Parties on both sides of the issues surrounding John Kerry are aggressively pushing points of view but are being corrected by other users such as User:AlistairMcMillan. The article is a focus of attention by many users, some of whom can be expected to rectify and moderate the attempts of partisans such as Rex071404 and Neutrality to insert their point of view. Fred Bauder 13:44, Aug 13, 2004 (UTC)

I have reconsidered my position regarding temporary relief based on the most recent edits by Rex071404 to John Kerry. One set of reverts was over an absurdly petty matter of phrasing, others are over efforts to inject a hypercritical point of view into the article. The article needs to be about John Kerry, not a blow by blow account of the ebb and flow of mud slinging efforts. Fred Bauder 05:01, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

I drafted a proposed temporary order which would also have restricted User:Neutrality and extended also to the analogous Bush articles but when I began looking for examples I found mostly constructive edits by Neutrality, at least to George W. Bush, so abandoned that idea. Fred Bauder 14:43, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

Example of fixing the article
With respect to the proposed remedy and enforcement mechanism I have proposed, for example the detailed information about each wound suffered and act performed by John Kerry during his tour of duty and the story related by each witness might be replaced by a brief reference to the fact that a controversy has arisen during the campaign regarding his actions and medals together with a link to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. I have removed this from the remedy, because although it is listed as an example, it addresses specific content. Fred Bauder 14:56, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

 * Using the guidelines at Summary style would be better. That way John Kerry article would be a summary of his whole life while daughter articles can go into detail about some parts of his life. --mav 05:27, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * You're missing the point, mav. The exact question of how to do this is a matter for editors, not arbitrators. The point is that John Kerry should probably be a general encyclopedia article. The question of how to get there from here is a seperate mattter. Martin 23:16, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Explanation of call for ban
This complex of disputes goes on and on and gets worse and worse. Although some of those who complain regarding Rex071404 have offended in some ways themselves, the one "keeping the hell agoing" is Rex071404. Fred Bauder 16:35, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm getting frustrated -- the longer we delay, the worse Rex gets. Now he's stalking his perceived enemies to non-political articles.  If it wouldn't delay things for weeks, I'd propose an outright ban.  He is displaying obvious contempt for policy, decency, and this proceeding. Jwrosenzweig 20:59, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Motion to close
Since Rex has left Wikipedia, there is no point is prolonging this matter and keeping it here. I move that the matter be closed and archived, subject to reactivation if Rex returns. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 17:20, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

I don't think non-arbitrators are allowed to make motions, but I agree with the reasoning so I'll make it instead. →Raul654
 * I know I'm not supposed to make comments here, but it doesn't seem like anyone has read the talk page - Rex has not left, as he just voted on Neutrality's adminship request. Ambi 23:58, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) Close the case, subject to re-activation. →Raul654 04:42, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * He just voted. He hasn't left, so keep it open. →Raul654 17:59, Oct 11, 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Ditto. James F. (talk) 17:13, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * No, soldier on... Fred Bauder 15:34, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Fred, Martin 15:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) mav 03:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)


text:
List of presidents of the Philippines

Under the Constitution of the Philippines, the president of the Philippines (Pangulo ng Pilipinas) is both the head of state and government, and serves as the commander-in-chief of the country's armed forces. The president is directly elected by qualified voters to a six-year term and must be "a natural-born citizen of the Philippines, a registered voter, able to read and write, at least forty years of age on the day of the election, and a resident of the Philippines for at least ten years immediately preceding such election". No elected president can seek re-election. Upon resignation, or removal from office, the vice president assumes the post. A president's successor who has not served for more than four years can still seek a full term for the presidency.

History
Emilio Aguinaldo became the inaugural president of the Philippines under the Malolos Republic, considered the First Philippine Republic. He held that office until 1901 when he was captured by United States forces during the Philippine–American War (1899–1902). The American colonization of the Philippines abolished the First Republic, which led to an American governor-general exercising executive power.

In 1935, the United States, pursuant to its promise of full Philippine sovereignty, established the Commonwealth of the Philippines following the ratification of the 1935 Constitution, which also restored the presidency. The first national presidential election was held, and Manuel L. Quezon (1935–44) was elected to a six-year term, with no provision for re-election, as the second Philippine president and the first Commonwealth president. In 1940, however, the Constitution was amended to allow re-election but shortened the term to four years. A change in government occurred three years later when the Second Philippine Republic was organized with the enactment of the 1943 Constitution, which Japan imposed after it occupied the Philippines in 1942 during World WarII. José P. Laurel acted as puppet president of the new Japanese-sponsored government; his de facto presidency, not legally recognized until the 1960s, overlapped with that of the president of the Commonwealth, which went into exile. The Second Republic was dissolved after Japan surrendered to the Allies in 1945; the Commonwealth was restored in the Philippines in the same year with Sergio Osmeña (1944–46) as president.

Manuel Roxas (1946–1948) followed Osmeña when he won the first post-war election in 1946. He became the first president of the independent Philippines when the Commonwealth ended on July4 of that year. The Third Republic was ushered in and would cover the administrations of the next five presidents, the last of which was Ferdinand Marcos (1965–86), who performed a self-coup by imposing martial law in 1972. The dictatorship of Marcos saw the birth of the New Society (Bagong Lipunan) and the Fourth Republic. His tenure lasted until 1986 when he was deposed in the People Power Revolution. The current constitution came into effect in 1987, marking the beginning of the Fifth Republic.

Of the individuals elected as president, three died in office: two of natural causes (Manuel L. Quezon and Manuel Roxas ) and one in a plane crash (Ramon Magsaysay, 1953–57 ). The longest-serving president is Ferdinand Marcos with 24 years, 185 days in office; he is the only president to have served more than two terms. The shortest is Sergio Osmeña, who spent 24 years, 185 days in office.

Two women have held the office: Corazon Aquino (1986–92), who ascended to the presidency upon the successful People Power Revolution of 1986, and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (2001–10), who, as vice president, ascended to the presidency upon Estrada's resignation and was elected to a full six-year term in 2004.

Unofficial presidents
Andrés Bonifacio is considered by some historians to be the first president of the Philippines. He was the third Supreme President (Spanish: Presidente Supremo; Tagalog: Kataastaasang Pangulo) of the Katipunan secret society. Its Supreme Council, led by the Supreme President, coordinated provincial and district councils. When the Katipunan went into open revolt in August 1896 (the Cry of Balintawak), Bonifacio transformed it into a revolutionary government with him as president. While the term Katipunan remained, Bonifacio's government was also known as the Tagalog Republic (Tagalog: Republika ng Katagalugan; Spanish: Republica Tagala). (Although the word Tagalog refers to a specific ethnicity, Bonifacio used it to denote all indigenous people in the Philippines in place of Filipino which had colonial origins.)

Some historians contend that including Bonifacio as a past president would imply that Macario Sakay and Miguel Malvar y Carpio should also be included. Miguel Malvar y Carpio continued Emilio Aguinaldo's leadership of the First Philippine Republic after the latter's capture until his own capture in 1902. Macario Sakay revived the Tagalog Republic in 1902 as a continuation of Bonifacio's Katipunan. They are both considered by some scholars as "unofficial presidents". Along with Bonifacio, Malvar and Sakay are not recognized as presidents by the Philippine government.

Emilio Aguinaldo is officially recognized as the first president of the Philippines, but this is based on his term of office during the Malolos Republic, later known as the First Philippine Republic. Prior to this Aguinaldo had held the presidency of several revolutionary governments which are not counted in the succession of Philippine republics.

Manuel L. Quezon delegated his presidential duties to José Abad Santos, the then Chief Justice, when the former fled the Philippines amidst Japanese occupation of the islands to establish a government-in-exile. He is believed to have in effect become the acting president of the Philippine Commonwealth though no legal document has been retrieved detailing the official transfer of the title of President to Abad Santos.

Vice presidents
3 other former vice presidents (S. Laurel, Binay, and Robredo) all made failed runs for the presidency.

Cabinet secretaries
The following cabinet secretaries are only served for fulltime. Vice Presidents served as cabinet secretary concurrently are not included.

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

title: List of presidents of the Philippines


text:
Talk:List of presidents of the Philippines

Comment
Nice work Howard the Duck! --Noypi380 13:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! The lead section needs a improvement, though. I'd want this to be a featured list someday.--Howard the Duck | talk, 14:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Not just someday, but very soon. As early as now, I think it can be nominated already for a good list. :) --Noypi380 14:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Presidential "family tree"
I found this article which explains how 12 of the 14 presidents of the Philippines are actually related--either by marriage or by blood. The "family tree" also includes prominent politicians, aristocratic clans, business magnates, television personalities, beauty queens, and Spanish-era war heroes. The article is in text form, hence, it will be interesting to see an illustration of it as a "family tree." Although personally, I will not encourage its posting in this article, it is worth making a new article out of it. As a person from the Philippines, the family tree is a tangible illustration of a prevailing theme/thesis in Philippine history/sociology. That the Philippine society is ruled by a small group--which has not really changed since the Spanish-era. The family that ruled before is still the family that ruled today. Joey80 02:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Nice one Joey.. Did you see how related the American presidents are?... its amazing how people can traced the lineage of such distinguished people.. even Obama is related to the Bushes... peads (talk) 06:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Disputed Content
Emilio Aguinaldo's government is recognized by the Philippine government. I think Laurel's is too. Statements that say otherwise contradict the rest of the content of the article. I've removed one paragraph in the overview that did that but the chart under unconfirmed presidents needs to remove one of the entries for Aguinaldo to reflect the recognition given to government with the declaration of independence on June 12, 1898. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lambanog (talk • contribs) 21:43, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Copyright of Photos
I notice some photos are being removed because of copyright concerns. I would note, however, that some of them are over 50 years old and probably pass the Philippine criteria for entering into the public domain. Lambanog (talk) 18:59, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * If that's the case, then the images may be mistagged. I removed any which were tagged as non-free images, but you may want to go through and review them to make sure that they are appropriately licensed. I'm not familiar with Filipino copyright law, but I would bet that the Commons would have some useful resources to help. (ESkog)(Talk) 01:22, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

ALL PRESIDENTS FART
What is this? I see that someone vandalized the article as an insult. How can i remove the beginning vandalizing statement? 112.208.5.111 (talk) 14:29, 15 January 2013 (UTC) your so ugly kkkkkkk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.77.100 (talk) 08:56, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

inclusion of Jose Abad Santos, as acting president of the philippines
as stated in his biography. "When President Manuel L. Quezon left for the United States via Australia, Chief Justice Abad Santos was given the choice to leave with him. But the latter preferred to remain in the Philippines and carry on his work and stay with his family. President Quezon appointed him Acting President with full authority to act in the name of, and on behalf, of the President of the Philippines in areas unoccupied by the Japanese"

can someone please give am explanation about this?

--CommanderPhoenix (talk) 04:35, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I think you have a point, Jose Abad Santos indeed became a acting president during World War II, but no laws exists that honor J. A. Santos as a Official President I recommend that search for furthermore reliable sources, if you find enough sources you can add Jose Abad Santos as an List of Unofficial President...-121.54.2.91 (talk) 13:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

thank you for that clarification but i think we can ask Ambeth Ocampo on facebook to give us a clarification for that matter and if this is true, we can place J.A Santos to the unofficial presidents of the philppines --CommanderPhoenix (talk) 06:42, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

 * That sort of clarification would not satisfy Wikipedia's verifiability policy. A bit of googling, however, turned up Wtmitchell  (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 07:37, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Ditch the PM
Anyone agree? – Howard  the   Duck  14:19, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
 * They have been removed. – HTD  ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens. ) 07:03, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Official portraits
As work of the Philippine government, they are of public domain. Why can't they be uploaded like the US Presidential portraits? --Truflip99 (talk) 00:10, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * They are not in the public domain. – HTD  ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens. ) 06:55, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with Truflip99 that there would be an official portrait of every Filipino presidents, if ever my request granted this article will provide a better understanding to the readers...-121.54.2.91 (talk) 13:19, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * They can't be used under here WP:Fair use -- they can't even be used at the articles of the presidents per se unless the portrait is discussed too. Blame the government for crappy legislation. – H T  D  14:02, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If possible, please provide an official portrait for the Philippine Presidents just like the US Presidential Portraits. The article will be more interesting. please grant my request...-121.54.2.91 (talk) 11:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * For some reason, the Wikimedia Foundation ruled that the portraits of the presidents produced by the Philippine government are under Fair use. That means they can only be used on the articles of the presidents themselves. There are two ways to bring back those official portraits here:
 * Convince the Wikimedia Foundation that the Philippine laws say that works published by the Philippine government aren't bound by fair use regulations.
 * Convince Congress to amend the law so that the Wikimedia Foundation can rule that works published by the Philippine government can be used anywhere.
 * This is problem not only in presidential portraits, or indeed in works published by the Philippine government; there are also issues when it comes to freedom of panorama where statues and works of art displayed publicly can't be used freely. Again, put the blame on crappy legislation. – H T  D  01:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Any updates if the portraits can now be included? 121.54.54.58 (talk) 10:06, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Dates of Aguinaldo's term(s)
A discussion taking place at Talk:President of the Philippines appears to impact this article as well. Some editors of this article may want to comment there. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Aguinaldo
This edit tweaked the beginning date of Aguinaldo's presidency, saying "terms preceeding the First Philippine Republic are excluded". The article's lead section contains an assertion: "Emilio Aguinaldo's government wasn't officially recognized by the Government of the Republic of the Philippines until the term of Diosdado Macapagal. That assertion is supported by a citation of this source.

The cited supporting source is a Presidential Proclamation declaring Tuesday, June 12, 1962, as a special public holiday throughout the Philippines in commemoration of our people's declaration of their inherent and inalienable right to freedom and independence — it says nothing about officially recognizing any of Aguinaldo's various governments.

I am aware that Aguinaldo is generally considered in the Philippines as having legitimately held the office of President during his Malolos Republic presidency, and my guess is that the RP government of the does document that somehow, somewhere, but I haven't been able to find and verify a reliable source supporting that. This ought to be clarified and a verifiable RS cited which supports the clarification. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 06:27, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The now defunct pangulo.ph only listed Aguinaldo's term as after the First Philippine Republic was declared, excluding everything before it such as the Malolos Congress and the Biak-na-Bato Republic. – HTD  ( ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens. ) 08:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * On another article's talk page, here, I mention a source I found yesterday which seems workable here. I've rewritten the relevant paragraph of the lead and cited that source to support it. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:47, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Calling all Wikipedians participating in this article
There is imminent vandalism occurring in this page, entering biased opinions and renaming presidents to something with no point whatsoever, for example: WE, as users seeking to keep general information strong, have to be cautious of any bad reference to maintain integrity of this article, and if not, all other articles. May messages be heard... NJKFalcon (talk) 20:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Renaming Emilio Aguinaldo to "Rane Matute"
 * Renaming Benigno Aquino III to "Bulbulito Bayagyagis"

Second Dictatorship?
It is true that Emilio Aguinaldo was the first Filipino dictator of the Philippines (May 23-June 29, 1898) However, it is Jose P. Laurel who followed as the second Filipino dictator by declaring martial law in 1944 through Proclamation No. 29, dated September 21. Martial law came into effect on September 22, 1944 at 9:00 am. Therefore, the Marcos dictatorship must be the third one.
 * Pending a reference on the nature of the proclamation, it's quite convincing. However, there had been issues on labeling these as "first" and "second dictatorship" and so forth as no real history book labels it as such. Anyone has other ideas? – H  T  D  15:14, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * While it is true that most Philippine history books do not talk anything of Laurel's Martial Law, let us consider that this actually happened, as said in Nick Joaquin's Manila, My Manila, published 1990, and by this link. Arius1998 (talk) 05:30, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * How about the issue on calling it "first dictatorship" and so forth when no other book calls it as such? – H T  D  08:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, since no book yet labels it as such, let's settle with something we can do, like Aguinaldo dictatorship. Besides, he only had it for a month, a sort of transition period before the Malolos Republic. What do you think? Arius1998 (talk) 10:43, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm OK with that. – H T  D  11:00, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The article still uses "second dictatorship", a term that I have never heard or read before, as HtD mentioned. Should we just remove them and leave "dictatorship" instead, or "martial law dictatorship" since the period is known as "martial law". --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 04:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * If it's too weird, I suggest "Marcos dictatorship". Or "Martial law under Aguinaldo/Marcos". I just liked ordinal numbers. "First Dictatorship", "Second Republic", etc. and thought it would've been consistent with the "Republics". – H T  D  12:18, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: It seems that the time period for the Aguinaldo dictatorship isn't included in his term of office as president. There's this issue with Laurel having dictatorial powers too. Cory Aquino also ruled by decree during her first year in office. – H T  D  12:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

 * This Philippine Government web page on Aguinaldo's presidency leads off by saying as part of its header, "President of the First Republic : January 23, 1899 - March 23, 1901" (from the establishment date of the insurgent Malolos Republic to the date of Aguinaldo's capture by US forces). The body of the page mentions his terms as President of the Biak-na-Bato Republic, as Dictator of the Dictatorial Government, and as President of the Revolutionary Government as well, but it seems clear from that page that currently only Aguinaldo's term as President of the Malolos Republic is considered legitimate by the Philippine government for recognition as a Presidential term. I have updated the article to reflect this information, citing that source. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Presidency during early American Colonial Period: "abolished" versus "defunct"; "occupied" versus "exercised"
When discussing the presidency after Aguinaldo but before the Commonweath, which is more neutral, accurate. and succinct: I would argue for using "defunct" instead of "abolished", "exercised" instead of "occupied", and with only one date. "Defunct" and "exercised" because the office just ceased to be. The Insular Government did not abolish the office because it never recognized the office nor the government which created the office. Same with "occupied" -- the Governor-General did not take over the office from Aguinaldo. There was no transition from Aguinaldo to the Governor-Generals. There was no transition team. The American governor-generals did not march into Aguinaldo's office, kick him out and start ruling. Instead, there was a fight between two separate claimants to be successors to Spanish rule. There were two governments and two executives who both claimed sovereignty over the Philippines, both claiming to be successors to the Spanish Governors-General and neither being predecessors of the others. The two fought a war and one side lost. Therefore one executive became defunct and its powers exercised by the other. It is not accurate to say that one executive was abolished (a word that implies an executive or legislative action); occupied (how can you occupy an abolished office?); or that one had a start date after the other (the American military governor took over directly form the Spanish in 1898 in Manila while Aguinaldo created a parallel executive outside of Manila). --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * "Abolished; occupied by the US Civil Governors of the Philippine Islands from July 4, 1901 to November 15, 1935.", or
 * "Defunct; executive power exercised by the Governor General of the Philippines under the American colonial Insular Government until November 15, 1935."?
 * Since there has been no comments after over two months, I will assume a WP:Consensus per Silence and consensus and make the edit. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 14:27, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Support (belated expression thereof) per reasoning as explained above. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 02:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Reasons I changed photos
I changed three photos -- of Osmena, of Gloria, and of PNoy. In reverse order, I think that we should use official portraits when available and so I put in PNoy's official portrait. I think that we should use head shots when available and we should be careful of NPOV especially in the background and so I put in a head shot of GMA without any military officials in the background (some argue that hers was a militarized administration). Finally, I think that we should use photos from as close to when they were in office as possible and so I put in a photo of Osmena from the 1930s when he was Vice President to replace a photo of him when he was younger. Feel free to disagree. --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The only issue in photos is if they are allowed to be used here. If the photo can only be used under fair use conditions, it can't be used. As for official portraits, before, the official portraits were considered to be used only in fair use conditions, but I dunno their status now. – H T  D  05:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I assumed that if the photos were on Wikicommons that they were allowed to be used. Is that not the case?  Should we remove these photos on Wikicommons?  --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * As long as the photos stay on Commons, it's OK. As for they should stay there, that's a different question. – H T  D  06:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Re the GMA photo, which a few have changed a few times since my comment above ... User:Howard the Duck changed the photo and commented in the edit notes "GMA's face is too small here to be recognizable", which I agree with. The photo that he added is the same as the one used at Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.  I think that we should use that photo -- the one used on main article on her on the right Gloria Macapagal Arroyo WEF 2009-crop.jpg-- until a better head shot comes along.  Beyond the NPOV issues of showing her with camouflaged soldiers in the background, I don't like the idea that the soldiers are not Filipino but American, not only for NPOV issues but because this is a Philippine topic, see right Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.jpg --Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 05:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Some IP's hellbent on using the pic with soldiers... there's actually 2 pics he can't decide what to use (lol). – H T  D  09:19, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
 * No other comments. I assume therefore WP:Consensus and will change the photo.--Iloilo Wanderer (talk) 04:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Just so and other users know: Commons allows for the free uploading of Philippine government-produced works. --Sky Harbor (talk) 23:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2016
ĝ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.101.140.182 (talk) 22:42, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on List of Presidents of the Philippines. 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/20160527002034/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160617132725/http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/ to http://www.gov.ph/constitutions/1987-constitution/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121104144908/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/first-republic/emilio-aguinaldo/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/first-republic/emilio-aguinaldo/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304041620/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/commonwealth/sergio-osmena/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/commonwealth/sergio-osmena/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150315013844/http://malacanang.gov.ph/5235-70th-anniversary-of-the-second-philippine-republic/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/5235-70th-anniversary-of-the-second-philippine-republic/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160323182339/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/second-republic/jose-p-laurel/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/second-republic/jose-p-laurel/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121104144918/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/third-republic/carlos-garcia/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/third-republic/carlos-garcia/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121104134523/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/fifth-republic/corazon-aquino/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/fifth-republic/corazon-aquino/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160323145024/http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/fifth-republic/fidel-ramos/ to http://malacanang.gov.ph/presidents/fifth-republic/fidel-ramos/

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) 04:46, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Presidents of the Philippines. 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/20131207101411/http://tumblr.malacanang.gov.ph/post/35829060703/the-ritual-climbing-of-the-main-stairs-of to http://tumblr.malacanang.gov.ph/post/35829060703/the-ritual-climbing-of-the-main-stairs-of

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) 01:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Presidents of the Philippines. 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/20160630212559/http://www.interaksyon.com/lifestyle/inside-malacaang-complex-3-places-to-visit-for-a-charming-date-with-history to http://www.interaksyon.com/lifestyle/inside-malacaang-complex-3-places-to-visit-for-a-charming-date-with-history

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Presidents of Sri Lanka which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 13:00, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Prime Minister discussion
Please see the discussion at Talk:Prime Minister of the Philippines and comment there as appropriate. Thank you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 15:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page have been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reasons for deletion at the file description pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:39, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Ferdinand Marcos official.jpg
 * Fidel Ramos cropped.jpg
 * President Diosdado Macapagal official cropped.jpg
 * President Ramon Magsaysay official portrait.jpg

Redesign and simplification
Sometimes less is more. See List of presidents of the United States, for example. The current table has too many columns (Former positions? Order in era?), is split into many tables instead of just one, and has 34 notes, with 9 subnotes! Presentation has become way too complicated. How about this:

(This was the format of the table before it became like this.) Here are the footnotes that should be retained: As for other footnotes we can perhaps explain that at length in prose. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Aguinaldo's term ended: Footnote 5
 * 2) Constitution didn't provide a VP: Footnote 7, 19 (same footnote moving forward)
 * 3) Died in office: Footnote 9, 21, 23 (same footnote moving forward)
 * 4) Liberal wing of the Nacionalista: Footnote 15
 * 5) Two wings of the Liberals: Footnote 17
 * 6) Martial law explanation: Footnotes 25-26 with the subnotes.
 * 7) Fourth Republic explanation: Footnote 30
 * 8) Aquino ascendancy: Footnote 31
 * 9) Estrada ouster: Footnote 33

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 nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Malacañang Palace (Cropped).jpg

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) 02:52, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 * President Marcos Jr.jpg

Year
Of the 17 presidents 143.44.165.129 (talk) 01:43, 12 February 2023 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Patrick ns

-

title: User talk:Patrick ns


text:
Mount Bierstadt

Mount Bierstadt is a 14065 ft mountain summit in the Front Range of the Rocky Mountains, in the U.S. state of Colorado. The fourteener is located in the Mount Evans Wilderness of Pike National Forest, 15.1 km south by east (bearing 171°) of the Town of Georgetown in Clear Creek County. It was named in honor of Albert Bierstadt, an American landscape painter who made the first recorded summit of the mountain in 1863.

Mountain
Mount Bierstadt is located 2.2 km west by south of Mount Blue Sky and 70.5 km west by south of downtown Denver.

Because it is generally considered an easy climb, along with its accessibility from nearby Denver, Mount Bierstadt is one of the most popular mountains to climb in Colorado. As with most peaks in Colorado, July and August make the best months for climbing Mount Bierstadt.

The most popular base from which to begin ascent of Mount Bierstadt is Guanella Pass, located to the west. From Guanella Pass it is approximately a 7 mi hike, with a climb of 2391 ft. The trail descends slightly into the fairly level marshlands surrounding Scott Gomer Creek before reaching Bierstadt's western slopes. On the rocky upper regions of the mountain the route of the trail is marked by a series of cairns. The trail levels about 200 ft below the summit at saddle point before beginning the final ascent. Alternative trails cover the eastern slopes for longer hikes.

Once at the summit, a popular option is to continue the hike to nearby Mount Blue Sky along a ridge known as The Sawtooth, an intermediate-level hike that overlooks Abyss Lake, which occupies the bottom of the valley separating Bierstadt and Blue Sky.

Albert Bierstadt's painting A Storm in the Rocky Mountains, Mt. Rosalie is based on sketches he made during his 1863 visit to the area. That painting shows either Mount Spalding or Mount Blue Sky (it is ambiguous) from the Chicago Lakes, 3 mi north-northwest, but Bierstadt and his guide William Byers climbed onward to the summit of either Blue Sky or Spalding (the account is ambiguous).

title: Mount Bierstadt


text:
Talk:Composite data structure

I thought we had some example; is there any reason not to have one? -- Taku 23:43, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Composite data structure


text:
User:Avnionur

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for putting in the stubs for Turkey's provinces. Can you please bold the titles too and link Turkey. You can do it like this Canakkale Province and Turkey. Thanks. Danny 23:43, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: User:Avnionur


text:
User talk:James H. Bath

“Rhythm Our Cosmic Instinct”

by

James H. Bath

Music is universal to all humans. Everyone can appreciate it and even create it to some degree or another, whether conducting an orchestra or simply humming a tune or drumming our fingers on a tabletop. Researchers wonder about this universal instinct for music and analyze the question in a variety of laboratory settings. But the answer is not all that complicated when you count rhythm as an indispensable part of life.

You can hear an unlearned child pluck notes on a piano or guitar which have no apparent rhythm. But embedded in each note struck by the little hands are frequencies of sound waves passing through the air and into the ear. A “C” note is a periodic train of airwaves striking the ear with a certain frequency while a “D” note is the same thing but with a different frequency. Though some note combinations are discordant and others harmonious, it is all rhythm. Steady frequency is rhythm. Day and night cycles have steady frequencies of coming and going, and they too are rhythm.

Rhythm abounds. It comes from the Sun as a plethora of frequencies making up the electromagnetic spectrum. Infrared, visible light, x-ray, gamma ray, and other frequencies pulsate through space and into our atmosphere with relentless consistency. They pound us with tempo every day. They drive this beat into our plants, into the molecules of the air we breathe, the waters of our oceans, into our skin, eyes, and hair, and into everything else that makes up our environment on Earth and beyond. It’s no wonder rhythm is universally recognized, instinctively as well as consciously.

Language itself, once learned, is musical for we find rhythm in the act of expressing ourselves, whether orally or written. We make and hear the smooth rhythms of dialect we learn to speak over a lifetime. We take these so for granted that we don’t even notice we regularly use this polished and musical skill.

We can hear the rhythm of language best when listening to someone speak in a tongue we know little or nothing about because at such times we are not distracted by the “meanings” of the words. We hear only the sounds of the words, their music, not what they mean. And, of course, meaning itself can be rhythmic and musical, as in the case of poetry (I mean the harmonious arrangements of the imagery, as well as the tempo or meter). Heartbeat is another rhythm, or form of natural music which has its origins deep in the cosmic recesses of the universe.

Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson won the 1978 Nobel Prize in physics for their 1964 accidental discovery of the cosmic microwave background radiation. This radiation is often called the echo of the Big Bang from which the universe allegedly began. It permeates the universe. It’s a rhythm that is everywhere.

In the late 6th century BC, Pythagoras made reference to the “Music of the Spheres”, a sound he said he could hear. He attributed this to the movement of things in the heavens. The rhythm and music were big parts of his teachings and the lives of his disciples. It was considered an organizing factor of life. They sang hymns to Apollo and used the lyre to cure illness of the body and soul. And they recited poetry before and after sleep to sharpen memory.

In ancient India, a system of yoga meditation emerged called Shabd Yoga, translated as “Sound Current Yoga.” Possibly Pythagoras knew about this. The practice of this yoga involves immersing one’s total attention into a high-pitched sound emanating from within his or her body and brain, and then following this sound consciously to its source, which is said to be God. This may be directly or indirectly related to the cosmic microware background radiation that Penzias and Wilson so recently discovered.

Rhythm affects us on our deepest levels. Even our cells are dancing to the natural music. Using advanced imaging techniques and lasers, Daniel Ou-Yang’s research group at Lehigh University studied intracellular molecular signals to learn about natural rhythms in endothelial cells. The skeletal rigidity of these cells change in a rhythmical pattern in the vicinity of their organelles (the cell’s organs).

“This rhythm tells us something is alive," says Ou-Yang. "But it raises other questions. What triggers this rhythm? And what is its significance?”

Working with Ou-Yang was Elizabeth Rickter, a graduate student in physics, who was the first person to observe the rhythmic behaviors that appear to originate from endothelial cytoskeletons. Also working with the group was Laura Morkowchuk, a bioengineering student who studied the effect of the cytoskeletal vibration on the transport of proteins from the blood stream into a cell's interior.

Ou-Yang’s team was interested in cytoskeletal rhythm because it plays an important role in cell division. Learning how to control it might lead to more effective ways to fight the runaway cell division observed in cancerous tumors. Certain chemical treatments that are used to fight cancer induces rigidity in the cytoskeleton, effectively choking the tumor of its blood supply which is regulated by endothelial cells.

For more information on this study, see “With Optical 'Tweezers,' Researchers Pinpoint The Rhythmic Rigidity Of Cell Skeletons” ScienceDaily 2003-12-05 at http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/12/031204073933.htm

So rhythm is everywhere. It is a sine qua non of our existence.

We are creatures of habit; therefore we dance to our own rhythms everyday. Sadly, many of these rhythms are discordant with the rest of society and even with the other areas of our lives. One such discordant rhythm is the so-called “work” rhythm which we dance to in an uncoordinated and spastic way when we employ ourselves in occupations for which we have no aptitude or affection. We suffer miserably when doing this, for then we go against our own grain, our natural rhythm, the rhythm of the universe.

Our lives are music, and so we should do things that are musical to us. We should dance to the rhythm of the universe.

End.

title: User talk:James H. Bath


text:
Northrop High School

Northrop High School is a Fort Wayne Community Schools high school located in the northern suburbs of Fort Wayne, Allen County, Indiana, United States. Northrop is classified as 5A by the IHSAA. Northrop High School has had a sister school, the Goethe Gymnasium, in Fort Wayne's sister city, Gera, Germany, since 1994.

Demographics
The demographic breakdown of the 2180 students enrolled in 2021–2022 was:

 * Male - 49.4%
 * Female - 50.6%
 * Native American/Alaskan - 0.5%
 * Asian - 5,7%
 * Black - 19.1%
 * Hispanic - 17.7%
 * Native HawaiianPacific islander - 0.2%
 * White - 48.6%
 * Multiracial - 8.2%

Arts
Northrop's Mixed show choir, Charisma competes in competitions and festivals throughout the Midwest. Allure is Northrop's all female show choir. Allure competes similar to Charisma all around the Midwest. The Big Orange Pride or BOP is Northrop High School's Marching Band. They compete as an ISSMA Class A Open school, but switched to Class A Scholastic under the direction of Rob F. Wilson in 2016. They were 1983 ISSMA Class A State Champion.

Athletics
The Bruins are members of the Summit Athletic Conference. The school's team name is the Bruins and their colors are burnt orange, brown and teal. Many sports are offered at Northrop. Here is a listing, along with the state team championships won.

 * Baseball (boys)
 * State champ - 1983
 * Basketball (boys & girls)
 * Boys state champ - 1974
 * Girls state champ - 1986
 * Cross country (boys & girls)
 * Football (boys)
 * Golf (boys & girls)
 * Boys state champ - 1984
 * Gymnastics (girls)
 * Soccer (boys & girls)
 * Softball (girls)
 * Swimming (boys & girls)
 * Tennis (boys & girls)
 * Track (boys & girls)
 * Boys state champ - 1997, 2004
 * Girls state champ - 1981, 1991, 2000–2005, 2011, and 2013
 * Wrestling (boys)

Notable alumni

 * Dan Butler, American television, film, and stage actor.
 * Heather Headley, Broadway and R&B singer.
 * Jon Schaffer, guitarist in the power/thrash metal band Iced Earth.
 * Eric Wedge, NCAA Baseball manager for Wichita State University, formerly and MLB manager for the Cleveland Indians and the Seattle Mariners.
 * Josh Gaines, Arena Football League player.
 * Matt Land, Trine University football coach.
 * Walter Jordan, NBA basketball small forward.
 * Angie Hicks, co-founder of and Chief Customer Officer for Angi.

title: Northrop High School


text:
Talk:Sultan Abdulhamid I

We already have an article at Abdul Hamid I. Danny 23:48, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

And this was a copyvio from www.theottomans.org/english/family/abdulhamid1.asp (or perhaps www.osmanli700.gen.tr/english/sultans/27biography.html), so I have redirected it. Adam Bishop 23:51, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sultan Abdulhamid I


text:
Intertextuality

Intertextuality is the shaping of a text's meaning by another text, either through deliberate compositional strategies such as quotation, allusion, calque, plagiarism, translation, pastiche or parody,  or by interconnections between similar or related works perceived by an audience or reader of the text. These references are sometimes made deliberately and depend on a reader's prior knowledge and understanding of the referent, but the effect of intertextuality is not always intentional and is sometimes inadvertent. Often associated with strategies employed by writers working in imaginative registers (fiction, poetry, and drama and even non-written texts like performance art and digital media), intertextuality may now be understood as intrinsic to any text.

Intertextuality has been differentiated into referential and typological categories. Referential intertextuality refers to the use of fragments in texts and the typological intertextuality refers to the use of pattern and structure in typical texts. A distinction can also be made between iterability and presupposition. Iterability makes reference to the "repeatability" of certain text that is composed of "traces", pieces of other texts that help constitute its meaning. Presupposition makes a reference to assumptions a text makes about its readers and its context. As philosopher William Irwin wrote, the term "has come to have almost as many meanings as users, from those faithful to Julia Kristeva's original vision to those who simply use it as a stylish way of talking about allusion and influence".

History
Julia Kristeva coined the term "intertextuality" (intertextualité) in an attempt to synthesize Ferdinand de Saussure's semiotics: his study of how signs derive their meaning from the structure of a text (Bakhtin's dialogism); his theory which suggests a continual dialogue with other works of literature and other authors; and his examination of the multiple meanings, or "heteroglossia", of texts (especially novels) or individual words. According to Kristeva, "the notion of intertextuality replaces the notion of intersubjectivity" when we realize that meaning is not transferred directly from writer to reader but is instead mediated or filtered by "codes" imparted to the writer and reader by other texts. For example, when we read James Joyce's Ulysses we decode it as a modernist literary experiment or as a response to the epic tradition, or as part of some other conversation, or as part of many conversations at once. This intertextual view of literature, as shown by Roland Barthes, supports the concept that the meaning of a text does not reside in the text, but is produced by the reader in relation both to the text in question and the complex network of texts evoked by the reading process.

While the theoretical concept of intertextuality is associated with post-modernism, the device itself is not new. New Testament passages quote from the Old Testament and Old Testament books such as Deuteronomy or the prophets refer to the events described in Exodus (for discussions on using 'intertextuality' to describe the use of the Old Testament in the New Testament, see Porter 1997; Oropeza 2013; Oropeza & Moyise, 2016). Whereas a redaction critic would use such intertextuality to argue for a particular order and process of the authorship of the books in question, literary criticism takes a synchronic view that deals with the texts in their final form, as an interconnected body of literature. This interconnected body extends to later poems and paintings that refer to Biblical narratives, just as other texts build networks around Greek and Roman Classical history and mythology. Bullfinch's 1855 work The Age Of Fable served as an introduction to such an intertextual network; according to its author, it was intended "for the reader of English literature, of either sex, who wishes to comprehend the allusions so frequently made by public speakers, lecturers, essayists, and poets...".

Sometimes intertextuality is taken as plagiarism as in the case of Spanish writer Lucía Etxebarria whose poem collection Estación de infierno (2001) was found to contain metaphors and verses from Antonio Colinas. Etxebarria claimed that she admired him and applied intertextuality.

Post-structuralism
More recent post-structuralist theory, such as that formulated in Daniela Caselli's Beckett's Dantes: Intertextuality in the Fiction and Criticism (MUP 2005), re-examines "intertextuality" as a production within texts, rather than as a series of relationships between different texts. Some postmodern theorists like to talk about the relationship between "intertextuality" and "hypertextuality" (not to be confused with hypertext, another semiotic term coined by Gérard Genette); intertextuality makes each text a "living hell of hell on earth" and part of a larger mosaic of texts, just as each hypertext can be a web of links and part of the whole World-Wide Web. The World-Wide Web has been theorized as a unique realm of reciprocal intertextuality, in which no particular text can claim centrality, yet the Web text eventually produces an image of a community—the group of people who write and read the text using specific discursive strategies.

One can also make distinctions between the notions of "intertext", "hypertext" and "supertext". Take for example the Dictionary of the Khazars by Milorad Pavić. As an intertext, it employs quotations from the scriptures of the Abrahamic religions. As a hypertext, it consists of links to different articles within itself and also every individual trajectory of reading it. As a supertext, it combines male and female versions of itself, as well as three mini-dictionaries in each of the versions.

Examples in literature
Some examples of intertextuality in literature include:
 * Perhaps the earliest example of a non-anonymous author alluding to another is when Euripides, in his Electra (410s BC), spoofs (in lines 524-38) the recognition scene from Aeschylus's The Libation Bearers.
 * East of Eden (1952) by John Steinbeck: A retelling of the account of Genesis, set in the Salinas Valley of Northern California.
 * Ulysses (1922) by James Joyce: A retelling of Homer's Odyssey, set in Dublin.
 * Absalom, Absalom! (1936) by William Faulkner: A retelling of the Absalom story from Samuel, set in antebellum Mississippi.
 * Earthly Powers (1980) by Anthony Burgess: A retelling of Anatole France's Le Miracle du grand saint Nicolas during the 20th century.
 * The Dead Fathers Club (2006) by Matt Haig: A retelling of Shakespeare's Hamlet, set in modern England.
 * A Thousand Acres (1991) by Jane Smiley: A retelling of Shakespeare's King Lear, set in rural Iowa.
 * Perelandra (1943) by C. S. Lewis: Another retelling of the account of Genesis, also leaning on Milton's Paradise Lost, but set on the planet Venus.
 * Wide Sargasso Sea (1966) by Jean Rhys: A metatextual intervention on Charlotte Brontë's Jane Eyre, the story of the "mad woman in the attic" told from her perspective.
 * The Legend of Bagger Vance (1996) by Steven Pressfield: A retelling of the Bhagavad Gita, set in 1931 during an epic golf game.
 * Bridget Jones's Diary (1996) by Helen Fielding: A modern "chick lit" romantic comedy replaying and referencing Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice.
 * Tortilla Flat (1935) by John Steinbeck: A retelling of the Arthurian legends, set in Monterey, California, during the interwar period.
 * Mourning Becomes Electra (1931) by Eugene O'Neill: A retelling of Aeschylus' The Oresteia, set in post-American Civil War New England.
 * The Gospel of Matthew narrates the early years of the life of Jesus while following a pattern from the Hebrew Bible's Book of Exodus.
 * Frankissstein (2019) by Jeanette Winterson: A retelling of Mary Shelley's 1818 classic Frankenstein, examining updated issues of the monstrous, i.e. sex-bots and cryonics.

Related concepts
Linguist Norman Fairclough states that "intertextuality is a matter of recontextualization". According to Per Linell, recontextualization can be defined as the "dynamic transfer-and-transformation of something from one discourse/text-in-context ... to another". Recontextualization can be relatively explicit—for example, when one text directly quotes another—or relatively implicit—as when the "same" generic meaning is rearticulated across different texts.

A number of scholars have observed that recontextualization can have important ideological and political consequences. For instance, Adam Hodges has studied how White House officials recontextualized and altered a military general's comments for political purposes, highlighting favorable aspects of the general's utterances while downplaying the damaging aspects. Rhetorical scholar Jeanne Fahnestock has found that when popular magazines recontextualize scientific research they enhance the uniqueness of the scientific findings and confer greater certainty on the reported facts. Similarly, John Oddo stated that American reporters covering Colin Powell's 2003 U.N. speech transformed Powell's discourse as they recontextualized it, bestowing Powell's allegations with greater certainty and warrantability and even adding new evidence to support Powell's claims.

Oddo has also argued that recontextualization has a future-oriented counterpoint, which he dubs "precontextualization". According to Oddo, precontextualization is a form of anticipatory intertextuality wherein "a text introduces and predicts elements of a symbolic event that is yet to unfold". For example, Oddo contends, American journalists anticipated and previewed Colin Powell's U.N. address, drawing his future discourse into the normative present.

Allusion
While intertextuality is a complex and multileveled literary term, it is often confused with the more casual term 'allusion'. Allusion is a passing or casual reference; an incidental mention of something, either directly or by implication. This means it is most closely linked to both obligatory and accidental intertextuality, as the 'allusion' made relies on the listener or viewer knowing about the original source. It is also seen as accidental, however, as the allusion is normally a phrase so frequently or casually used that the true significance is not fully appreciated. Allusion is most often used in conversation, dialogue or metaphor. For example, "I was surprised his nose was not growing like Pinocchio's." This makes a reference to The Adventures of Pinocchio, written by Carlo Collodi when the little wooden puppet lies. If this was obligatory intertextuality in a text, multiple references to this (or other novels of the same theme) would be used throughout the hypertext.

Plagiarism
Sociologist Perry Share describes intertextuality as "an area of considerable ethical complexity". Intertextuality does not necessarily involve citations or referencing punctuation (such as quotation marks) and can be mistaken for plagiarism. While the two concepts are related, the intentions behind using another's work is critical in distinguishing the two. When making use of intertextuality, usually a small excerpt of a hypotext assists in the understanding of the new hypertext's original themes, characters, or contexts. Aspects of existing texts are reused, often resulting in new meaning when placed in a different context. Intertextuality hinges on the creation of new ideas, while plagiarism attempts to pass off existing work as one's own.

Students learning to write often rely on imitation or emulation and have not yet learned how to reformulate sources and cite them according to expected standards, and thus engage in forms of "patchwriting," which may be inappropriately penalized as intentional plagiarism. Because the interests of writing studies differ from the interests of literary theory, the concept has been elaborated differently with an emphasis on writers using intertextuality to position their statement in relation to other statements and prior knowledge. Students often find it difficult to learn how to combine referencing and relying on others' words with marking their novel perspective and contribution.

Non-literary uses
In addition, the concept of intertextuality has been used analytically outside the sphere of literature and art. For example, Devitt (1991) examined how the various genres of letters composed by tax accountants refer to the tax codes in genre-specific ways. In another example, Christensen (2016) introduces the concept of intertextuality to the analysis of work practice at a hospital. The study shows that the ensemble of documents used and produced at a hospital department can be said to form a corpus of written texts. On the basis of the corpus, or subsections thereof, the actors in cooperative work create intertext between relevant (complementary) texts in a particular situation, for a particular purpose. The intertext of a particular situation can be constituted by several kinds of intertextuality, including the complementary type, the intratextual type and the mediated type. In this manner the concept of intertext has had an impact beyond literature and art studies.

In scientific and other scholarly writing intertextuality is core to the collaborative nature of knowledge building and thus citation practices are important to the social organization of fields, the codification of knowledge, and the reward system for professional contribution. Scientists can be skillfully intentional in the use of references to prior work in order to position the contribution of their work. Modern practices of scientific citation, however, have only developed since the late eighteenth century and vary across fields, in part influenced by disciplines’ epistemologies.

Additional citations

 * De Lange, Attie; Comhrink, Annette. 'The matrix and the echo': Intertextual re-modelling in Stoppard's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead. in Literator, vol. 123, 1991, pp. 69-74..
 * Griffig, Thomas. Intertextualität in linguistischen Fachaufsätzen des Englischen und Deutschen (Intertextuality in English and German Linguistic Research Articles). Frankfurt a.M.: Lang, 2006.
 * Kliese, M. (2013). Little Lamb analysis. CQUniversity e-courses, LITR19049 - Romantic and Contemporary Poetry.
 * Oropeza, B.J. "Intertextuality." In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Biblical Interpretation. Steven L. McKenzie, editor-in-chief. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013, Vol. 1, 453–63
 * B. J. Oropeza and Steve Moyise, eds. Exploring Intertextuality: Diverse Strategies for New Testament Interpretation of Texts (Eugene, Ore.: Cascade Books, 2016).
 * Pasco, Allan H. Allusion: A Literary Graft. 1994. Charlottesville: Rookwood Press, 2002.
 * Porter, Stanley E. "The Use of the Old Testament in the New Testament: A Brief Comment on Method and Terminology." In Early Christian Interpretation of the Scriptures of Israel: Investigations and Proposals (eds. C. A. Evans and J. A. Sanders; JSNTSup 14; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997), 79–96.

title: Intertextuality