text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche/Proposed decision

Previous talk
Martin, I have a question about the findings you have posted at Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche/Proposed decision. You congratulate Adam for re-writing the article Lyndon LaRouche from scratch. But it seems to me almost self-evident, that this article is chock full of innuendo, undocumented (and unattributed) accusations, and large dollops of clumsily obvious, heavy-handed propaganda (see updated list of wild fabrications and propagandistic slurs in the present version). It seems to me that even a person unfamiliar with LaRouche should be able to discern this, after reading this article. My question is the following: in what way does Adams's version of this article not violate the following:

Point #6 from What Wikipedia is not: Propaganda or advocacy of any kind. But of course an article can report objectively on what advocates say, as long as an attempt is made to approach a neutral point of view." --Herschelkrustofsky 20:53, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * To answer your question, Adam's version does not, in my judgement, appear to be propaganda or advocacy, and thus does not cause issues with the point you cite. This is not to make a judgement as to whether it is better or worse than the preceding version, nor whether either version is perfectly accurate and neutral.

 * I hope this helps. Martin 21:40, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

My copy of Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines propaganda as "the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person." The deliberations on the Talk:Lyndon LaRouche pages, in conjunction with Adam's admission on the Arbitration Evidence Page ("It is of course true that I and others editing here are hostile to LaRouche."), leave little doubt that what we have here is a lynch mob of sorts, editing at cross-purposes with Wikipedia policy as stated. --Herschelkrustofsky 15:04, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Your point is well taken. Although it is hard to imagine anyone from the United States or Australia that does not have strong opinions on Lyndon LaRouche it is obviously that both versions suffer from a partisan viewpoint as does the King book. Fred Bauder 18:24, Jul 28, 2004 (UTC)

Two comments from an onlooker
While I think I understand what Fred's proposed principle five is getting at, IMHO, it's a bit vague, and could really do with some clarification.

Secondly, I'm a little bit curious as to where Adam has supposedly attacked anyone during the proceedings of this arbitration. I believe this was the statement referred to in proposed remedy five.

To quote Adam:
 * Surely this is an error. The statement you quote doesn't even mention Krusty, let alone attack him. My personal attack on Krusty was to call him (from memory) a lying, slanderous piece of filth. If you want to convict me for making personal attacks, please do so over something which actually is a personal attack. I also point out that my personal attack on Krusty followed his description of a Jewish social-democratic member of the Australian Parliament as a fascist. I consider that to be far more offensive than anything I have said about Krusty.

This was one reference, in relation to these proceedings, to something he'd said earlier. I can't really see how this can be called "engaging in a pattern of personal attacks during this arbitration", nor how it warrants a week ban of a prolific and good contributor. Ambivalenthysteria 01:55, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * The second personal attack is contained in this post by Adam Carr, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Fred_Bauder&diff=0&oldid=4895236 and consists of the language, "...I called Herschelkrustofsky a slanderous piece of filth, a comment I made after due consideration and which I stand by." This is an excellent example of why having someone represent you in emotionally charged situations like this is a good idea. Fred Bauder 02:33, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. Isn't there a difference, however, between stating you still believe something you said earlier, even if that was rather...negative, and "a pattern of personal attacks", worthy of not only doubling, but increasing the original ban x7? That sounds like something I'd expect to apply to Irismeister - and applying it to Adam here seems like a bit of a stretch. Ambivalenthysteria 04:09, 29 Jul 2004

First, my initiative in this matter may or may not be supported by the other arbitrators. While I believe the findings are appropriate they remain only my position until they are considered by the other arbitrators. Second, this is very like the Wik cases where good and responsible behavior in one area is held to excuse nasty behavior in another. Fred Bauder 11:45, Jul 29, 2004 (UTC)

Status of this decision
Could we maybe move things along on this one, as it's getting a little stale? It appears that there are five votes to give Herschelkrustofsky a one-day ban, which is the same number of votes that Adam Carr's one-day ban (already served) was based on. I would be willing to execute this decision (if for no other reason than because I imposed Adam's ban, and wouldn't mind showing that I'm not playing favorites in this case), but nobody has requested it on Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested so I'm not sure if the decision is final. --Michael Snow 00:37, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Does this ruling apply to SlimVirgin vs. HerschelKrustofsky
SlimVirgin has initiated edit wars at numerous articles pertaining to Lyndon LaRouche, and has argued that LaRouche publications may not be used as sources in these articles, citing this ArbCom decision.

To my mind, the essential facts are these: the Arbcom ruling prohibits the inclusion of "original research" (which in this case I take to mean citations from the various print and electronic news media affiliated with the Lyndon LaRouche organization,) except in those articles where LaRouche and his movement are "closely related" or "highly relevant." Assuming that my interpretation of the ruling is correct, the articles where SlimVirgin has initiated edit wars are all clearly articles that conform to those criteria of "closely related" and "highly relevant." These are the article on the Schiller Institute, a LaRouche-affiliated organization; the article on Jeremiah Duggan, which alleges that attending a conference of the Schiller Institute caused Mr. Duggan to commit suicide; the article on Frederick Wills, a founder of the Schiller Institute; and the article on Dennis King, where the topic of the article is the fact that Mr. King wrote a book which accuses LaRouche of being a fascist. There have been minor conflicts on other pages, all LaRouche-related. SlimVirgin vehemently denies being an "anti-LaRouche activist," although in the one month that he has been editing Wikipedia his edit history is heavily weighted toward editing LaRouche-related articles. He authored the Jeremiah Duggan article during his second week at Wikipedia. He has also been deleting material from articles that I was completely unaware of, citing the arbcom decision; I would like to inquire as to whether this was the intention of the decision, which I thought was directed primarily at myself.

--H.K. 16:27, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It applies to any advocate of LaRouche, there is an organizational structure with supporters. There is some controversy over this point as some might feel it wrong to apply a ruling to new editors who may appear. I don't have any problem with it as I assume the organization, as an organization, will take an interest if it has not already done so. Similar restrictions probably should also apply to anti-activists. It's pretty hard to imagine anyone who would not have strong opinions on these issues and thus a tendency to edit from a POV. Fred Bauder 18:55, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Point well taken, but then the question becomes: if a LaRouche publication, cited by a LaRouche supporter, shall be considered "original research", would an anti-LaRouche publication, cited by an anti-activist, be given the same legal status under the ruling? That could become very complicated.

 * I'd like to make an observation, as well, respecting the journalistic quality of Executive Intelligence Review and other LaRouche publications: they are recognized as highly professional news publications; the EIR reporter that covers U.S. government matters has White House credentials and other relevant credentials; Google News includes EIR among the press that it spiders on the web; and EIR is widely quoted in other media, which seems to disturb SlimVirgin, because he must go looking for any press account that seems to echo EIR, in order to delete the reference from Wikipedia articles.

 * Let me emphasize in this regard, however, that the bone of contention here is a series of articles which may all be fairly described as "closely related" and "highly relevant", and my contention is that SlimVirgin is misusing the arbcom ruling by seeking to apply it to those articles. --H.K. 21:39, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with Herschelkrustofsky (for once) that it might be helpful to have the Arb Comm ruling clarified.

 * First, I want to make clear that I'm not an anti-LaRouche activist. I couldn't care less about LaRouche. The only reason I came to the LaRouche supporters' attention (and they to mine) is that I wrote an article on Jeremiah Duggan, an issue that affects their interests. My edit history shows that I've created or rewritten five articles in the last month. Apart from Jeremiah Duggan, these were about Bernard Williams, a well-known philosopher (the article is currently a Featured Article nomination); Rat Park, a famous psychology experiment, Cambridge Apostles}, a secret society; and [[Kenneth Bigley, a British hostage in Iraq. Nothing to do with LaRouche. On the other hand, Herschelkrustofsky's edits are 90 per cent or higher about LaRouche, and Weed Harper's and C Colden's 100 per cent.

 * The main issue here, as I see it, is the "no original research" rule. That is, all material in Wikipedia entries must have been published somewhere else already, preferably in a reputable publication. The Wikipedia guidelines and the material written by Jimbo Wales are very clear on this point.

 * In the case of Wikipedia entries about LaRouche and his organization, or "closely related" entries, it was accepted by the Arb Comm that the LaRouche organization's publications could be used as a reference, as the entries are about that organization.

 * However, it is still the case that the information must have been published somewhere; for example, on a LaRouche website or in a LaRouche journal. Herschelkrustofsky and the other LaRouche supporters (C Colden and Weed Harper) seem to believe that, because they are connected to the LaRouche organization, they can insert their own beliefs and views into articles they deem to be "closely related" to LaRouche, and can pass that off as knowledge. They provide no references at all for most of their edits. My argument is that the same "no original research" rule must apply to them as it does to all other Wikipedia editors on all other subjects.

 * Secondly, it would be helpful to have some clarification on what counts as being "about LaRouche and related people and organizations" and "closely related." For example, a Wikipedia entry on the journalist Dennis King is being edited by the LaRouche supporters; they don't like him because he wrote a book about LaRouche. Herschelkrustofsky writes above that: "the topic of the [Dennis King] article is the fact that Mr. King wrote a book which accuses LaRouche of being a fascist."

 * However, that this is the "topic" of the entry is just Herschelkrustofsky's claim, which he makes so he can count the entry as an article "about LaRouche and his organization" or "closely related." This will allow him, or so he thinks, to insert unverifiable, unpublished and arguably defamatory claims. But Dennis King is an established journalist who has been writing for over 30 years. One of the issues he has written about is Lyndon LaRouche. It is not the only one.

 * In summary, I am requesting clarification of the following:
 * (a) that the "no original research" rule applies to all Wikipedia editors on all subjects;
 * (b) that the "no original research" rule means that material in Wikipedia entries must have been published elsewhere previously, wherever possible in a reputable outlet; an exception being that LaRouche publications may be quoted in articles about LaRouche and his organization, or where LaRouche and his organization are being criticized, in which case the LaRouche point of view must be included; and
 * (c) that the phrase "about LaRouche and related people or organizations" or "closely related" cannot be extended to include everyone who has ever published criticism of Lyndon LaRouche. I am not asking for the phrase "closely related" to be defined by the Arb Comm, as it's almost impossible to do that: the issue will have to be judged on a case-by-case basis. But I am asking that it not be understood as an umbrella term to cover everyone who has criticized LaRouche. Slim 21:50, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

 * Herschelkrustofsky's entry above is typical of what I mean. He writes that Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) is "widely quoted in other media," without giving examples. EIR is widely quoted on issues pertaining to LaRouche because it is his main outlet. It is absolutely absurd to suggest that EIR is widely quoted by reputable news organizations unless they are doing a story about LaRouche. EIR is a vanity publication. As for EIR writers being granted White House accreditation, any writer who is not a terrorist and who requests it may be granted this. It means nothing. Slim 21:57, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

-

A point of order, with respect to SlimVirgin's assertions. It is completely untrue that my edits are "90% or higher" about LaRouche. I have, in fact, furnished evidence of this fact to SlimVirgin, at his request. It is also untrue that Weed Harper's edits are 100% about LaRouche. C Colden's edits, by my reckoning, are 89% about LaRouche, which is easy to calculate because she has only edited 9 articles, not counting talk pages. SlimVirgin, in discussing his own edits, is using a bit of captious reasoning, in that he refers to aticles that he has "created or rewritten", but avoids discussing articles that he has edited. Looking at his edit history, it appears that he is systematically searching Wikipedia for references to LaRouche, something that I myself have never done. --H.K. 22:21, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC) -

 * I don't think detailed analyses of user edits are entirely relevant here, but I would like to address Herschel's points. I believe that any reasonable person who looked at Herschelkrustofsky's, C Colden's, Weed Harper's and 64.30.208.48's edit histories would conclude that they are LaRouche activists or supporters; and that any reasonable person looking at my edits would NOT conclude that I am an anti-LaRouche activist.

 * First, all Weed Harper's contributions are here.
 * They are 100 per cent about LaRouche or related. Weed Harper also edits as 64.30.208.48. (This is not my speculation: he once failed to log on during a discussion, then did log on, and continued the discussion. The same IP address has been used to post pro-LaRouche posts on Usenet under the name Weed Harper and also under the name Ralph Gibbons  and was reported for sending out anonymous pro-LaRouche spam during the election.) 64.30.208.48's edits are here .They are 100 per cent LaRouche or related. All C Colden's edits are here . With the exception of the very first edit, they are 100 per cent LaRouche or related. Herschelkrustofsky has edited a greater number of articles, so I can't (without a lot of work) put an accurate percentage on the LaRouche-related material, but it appears to be over 90 per cent. He has not, as he claims above, shown me evidence of his non-LaRouche edits, though I have asked him to. In addition to the obvious LaRouche-related material, he also inserts LaRouche POV into other articles.
 * See this post, dated November 20. --H.K. 15:46, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * But some of these ARE considered by other editors to have LaRouche POV in them, which is why your edits are reverted. You're currently going through mediation because of it. I would like to see you compose a list of your edits that no editor could possibly argue had a LaRouche component to them. We would be able to balance that list on the head of a pin. Slim 19:46, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * I am in mediation because I requested it, and the other editor in question is Adam Carr (the originator of your conspiracy theory regarding my edits). Need I say more? --H.K. 15:29, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It would be wonderful if Herschel would just try to be a regular Wikpedia editor, regardless of his views on LaRouche, and sometimes edit or even write an article on flowers or philosophy or music (or whatever). While being single-minded doesn't count as a criticism -- lots of editors focus on their areas of expertise -- when that expertise involves the constant elevation of one controversial politician's point of view, then it becomes a problem. For example, in one of the Usenet posts written by 64.30.208.48, the writer refers to journalist Dennis King, who has criticized LaRouche, as a "sludge." I feel that anyone holding this view should be careful about editing the Wikipedia article on Dennis King and should probably recuse themselves; but that IP address does show up in the Dennis King history. The consequence of allowing LaRouche supporters to edit articles like these can be seen here  after a Herschelkrustofsky edit, which implies, without a reference, that Dennis King's LaRouche book may have been financed by the CIA, and here  where King is accused, again with no reference, of having earned a living as a student writing term papers for other students i.e. helping people to cheat. These are not encylopedic entries and they are possibly defamatory. In my view, this kind of writing has no place in Wikipedia.  Slim 22:58, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

I don't intend to keep on adding to this page, but I'd like to include some words from Jimbo Wales about the original research rule, as I feel that's the crux of the matter, and he has summed it up very well and has explained the reasoning behind it. These e-mails were sent out to WikiEN-l, so I assume it's appropriate to quote them here. I draw your attention to the second e-mail in particular, where he talks about the tendency of some editors to "produce novel narratives and historical interpretations." The points Jimbo Wales makes are important. What's at issue here is NOT whether LaRouche claims about the world are true. The issue is whether they are verifiable. Slim 23:16, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

On Fri, 3 Dec 2004, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

 * "The phrase orginated primarily as a practical means to deal with physics cranks, of which of course there are a number on the web. The basic concept is as follows: it can be quite difficult for us to make any valid judgment as to whether a particular thing is true or not. It isn't appropriate for us to try to determine whether someone's novel theory of physics is valid, we aren't really equipped to do that. But what we "can" do is check whether or not it actually has been published in reputable journals or by reputable publishers. So it's quite convenient to avoid judging the credibility of things by simply sticking to things that have been judged credible by people much better equipped to decide. The exact same principle will hold true for history, though I suppose the application will in some cases be a bit different and more subtle."

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales wrote:

 * "An article that makes no new low-level claims, but nonetheless synthesizes work in a non-standard way, is effectively original research that I think we ought not to publish. This comes up most often in history, where there is a tendency by some Wikipedians to produce novel narratives and historical interpretations with citation to primary sources to back up their interpretation of events. Even if their citations are accurate, Wikipedia's poorly equipped to judge whether their particular synthesis of the available information is a reasonable one."

 * "I think in part this is just a symptom of an unfortunate tendency of disrespect for history as a professional discipline. Some who completely understand why Wikipedia ought not to create novel theories of physics by citing the results of experiments and so on and synthesizing them into something new, may fail to see how the same thing applies to history."

-

I took a look at this article in Executive Intelligence Review. It contains the following passage:

 * "This aggressive diplomacy, which also included a trip to the region by South Korean President Roh Moo-Hyun, occurs at a moment of extraordinary international turmoil. The world financial system is spiralling out of control, reflected in the daily plummeting of the U.S. dollar. Synarchist financial and raw materials cartels are attempting to seize control of oil, strategic minerals, water, and food supplies, on a global scale. Their brutality is most visible in Africa, where gangs acting on behalf of oil and mining conglomerates have plundered entire regions and butchered their populations.

 * These Anglo-Dutch oligarchical interests plan the same fate for resource-rich Ibero-America. Large portions of the continent have already been "Africanized" by decades of the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) criminal free-market policies, resulting in desperate poverty, expanding narco-terrorism, and societal breakdown.

 * China, one of the world's largest raw material consumers, is attempting to navigate in these turbulent waters, by securing its own supply of strategic raw materials, energy resources, and food to meet the needs of its rapidly growing economy and population. The Chinese proved to be tough negotiators in extracting from Argentina and Brazil official recognition as a "market economy," which under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, limits the protective barriers these countries can put up against Chinese imports.

 * In exchange, China agreed to open its economy up to previously banned beef and poultry imports from both countries, and conferred on them the status of preferred tourist destinations for millions of Chinese tourists."

This article contains some factual information such as recognition of China as a market economy by Argentina and Brazil and opening up of China to beef and poultry imports. It also contains an original LaRouche take on the situation shown in the passages: "Synarchist financial and raw materials cartels are attempting to seize control of oil, strategic minerals, water, and food supplies, on a global scale. Their brutality is most visible in Africa, where gangs acting on behalf of oil and mining conglomerates have plundered entire regions and butchered their populations." and "These Anglo-Dutch oligarchical interests plan the same fate for resource-rich Ibero-America. Large portions of the continent have already been "Africanized" by decades of the International Monetary Fund's (IMF) criminal free-market policies, resulting in desperate poverty, expanding narco-terrorism, and societal breakdown." This is the sort of material that is referenced by the term original research, although Jimbo would rather the decision had been expressed in terms of POV. Inclusion of this material referenced back to LaRouche in the article, imperialism or possibly new imperialism would violate the ruling. The ruling is not based on the original material being false or not significant, but on its creative and original content. The same information from the People's Daily, the Hindu Times, Izvestia, the New York Times, the Economist, or even the Village Voice could be referenced in a Wikipedia article should for example the concept of Africanization become part of current knowledge. Fred Bauder 03:16, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

 * To answer Slim's questions:
 * Does "no original research" cover everyone? : Yes, it's a policy that covers everyone, and a highly crucial one in maintaining NPOV.
 * Does "no original research" extend to reproducing others'? : Well, to an extent; taking others' research, putting it here, and coming to conclusions of one's own would be covered by this; I think that it's a bit of a stretch to say that noting the views, however, comes under this policy.
 * Does the term "related [to LaRouche]" include critics? : Indeed, this was most definitely meant to mean those espousing his POV, although I would caution that this does not mean that anti-LaRouchians (?) have free-reign.
 * In truth, on reflection I'm not overly happy with the wording we chose to use here; we probably should have framed it in terms of POV instead, as Fred mentions above.
 * James F. (talk) 13:07, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

My answers to Slim's questions:
 * Does "no original research" cover everyone? : Yes, it's a policy that covers everyone, and a highly crucial one in maintaining NPOV.
 * Does "no original research" extend to reproducing others'? : "No original research" hinges on verifiability -- Wikipedia editors do not judge (in their writing here) the truth or validity of new ideas. It doesn't matter whether I state that I have proven that the world is secretly ruled by cabal of mutant space monkeys, or whether I state that Leroy Fibeetz, self-proclaimed Poobah of Grand Fenwick, has proven that the world is secretly ruled by cabal of mutant space monkeys -- both are prohibited as original research. Once Leroy's conclusions are written up in a publicly accessible forum, we can quote that forum, but we can't quote Leroy himself.
 * Does the term "related [to LaRouche]" include critics? : Yes. All articles involving LaRouche are held to the same standards -- NPOV, no original research, good grammar and spelling.
 * ➥the Epopt [[TINC| of the Cabal ]] 16:15, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Fred, James and Epopt, thanks for your responses. I think I expressed myself badly regarding my third query. The issue is this: The Arbcom ruled that LaRouche supporters ARE allowed to use LaRouche publications (which often include "original research" and controversial POV not found anywhere else) as references in articles that are "closely related" to LaRouche and where the information is "highly relevant." They are not allowed to use these publications anywhere else in Wikipedia, because the opinions in the publications are regarded as "novel narratives or historical interpretations," which Wikipedia does not allow.

The problem I have is that I feel LaRouche-supporting editors are interpreting this ruling too widely to allow themselves to insert LaRouche original research into articles that are not, in my view, closely related to LaRouche. For example, they are currently interpreting it to refer to the article on journalist Dennis King, because he wrote a critical book about LaRouche, and the LaRouche organization maintains almost a campaign of vilification against him because of that. The LaRouche-supporting editors want to be allowed to insert the LaRouche POV into the Dennis King article because, they argue, his authorship of the anti-LaRouche book makes him "closely related" and "highly relevant" to LaRouche. I feel they should not be allowed to do this because Dennis King is an established journalist who has written about issues other than LaRouche.

So what I'm trying to get a feel for is how the Arbcom wants "closely related" and "highly relevant" to be defined. An article about LaRouche is clearly "closely related" and "highly relevant." An article directly criticizing LaRouche is also "closely related" and "highly relevant" because the LaRouche organization must be allowed to defend itself. But is an article about a journalist who once wrote a book about LaRouche "closely related" and "highly relevant"? How about a journalist who once wrote an article about LaRouche? I feel we are on a slippery slope that is allowing LaRouche supporters to insert LaRouche POV and LaRouche original research into Wikipedia articles that have little or nothing to do with LaRouche. I know finding a definition of these terms is very hard, but any thoughts on what the intention of the Arbcom was (the spirit of the law, as opposed to the letter of the law) would be greatly appreciated. Slim 17:26, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Personal Attacks
In the past week, SlimVirgin has escalated his anti-LaRouche activism, initiating more edit wars, and added a new tactic, a pattern of personal attacks and other egregious violations of Wikiquette. Given Slimvirgin's obvious interest in this arbcom ruling, I would like to ask that the committee find him to be a partisan in the controversy, and to warn him that if he continues his abusive comments, he may find himself banned, as Adam and I were banned under the arbcom decision. SlimVirgin's abuse has been directed against myself, but he reserves his most violent language for the only female participant in the controversy, Caroline Colden:

 * "You are a toxic troll." Slim 20:07, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC) (Talk:Jeremiah Duggan)

 * "You are a poisonous troll." Slim 19:29, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC) (Talk:Schiller Institute)

--H.K. 23:21, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If he ever shows up before the arbitration commitee, we'll have to ban him for a day or two, at least. Fred Bauder 23:48, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * Fred, I stand by my view that Herschelkrustofsky, C Colden and Weed Harper (I believe the latter are the same person) are trolls; that they are in almost constant violation of the ArbCom ruling; and that they edit Wikipedia for the sole purpose of inserting pro-LaRouche propaganda. By the word "troll," I mean the definition given in What is a troll, particularly the section that says: "A troll deliberately exploits weaknesses of human nature or of an online community to upset people as much as possible. In other words, a vandal is a nuisance; a troll is a plague."

 * Every time an article mentioning LaRouche settles down into some form of stability after a compromise has been reached, C Colden makes another pro-LaRouche edit to start it all up again, either with no references or with absurd ones; or else s/he simply deletes other editors' properly referenced material. Herschelkrustofsky recently inserted material into Dennis King using, of all things, a white supremacist, pro-Nazi magazine as his source. I can only imagine the reaction of a reader who looks something up in Wikipedia for the first time, and sees that we use white supremacist magazines as our references. Herschelkrustofsky engaged in an edit war to keep the information and the reference in the article to the point where I had to ask for page protection.

 * This situation has been going on with these users for many months (since before I joined Wikipedia), causing a lot of extra work and distress for several editors, including AndyL, Ambi, Adam Carr, Xtra, DJSupreme23, 172, John Kenney, and now myself. I believe there has been one ArbCom ruling against them, and three mediations started, one of which continues. Yet they have made no contribution to Wikipedia other than to promote Lyndon LaRouche. I believe they enjoy the disruption they cause. I believe they enjoy the distress they cause to other editors. I believe they enjoy using Wikipedia's mediation and ArbCom procedures to cause more distress to, and work for, editors who are trying to keep out their propaganda. I believe they deliberately goad editors into criticizing them personally, so they can rush to the ArbCom with complaints of personal attacks. That is, I believe their behavior is "poisonous" and "toxic". I also believe the ArbCom ought to enforce its ruling against these users, namely "Supporters of Lyndon LaRouche are instructed . . . not to engage in activities that might be perceived as "promotion" of Lyndon LaRouche." (Passed with 5 of 6 active arbitrators on 2 August 2004. No votes against and no abstentions.) I cannot see the point of having a ruling if no one enforces it.

 * If you want to ban me for saying all this, and for calling them trolls, so be it. I believe that description of them is factual and that it constitutes fair comment. I hope you will also look at my comments in the context of the articles' Talk pages and my numerous efforts to have them observe Wikpedia NPOV and No Original Research policies. The only thing I ask is that they provide reputable references for their claims, but they won't do it. They are making this complaint now in an effort to poison the well because I have told them I'm considering approaching the ArbCom for a firmer ruling that would disallow them from editing LaRouche-related articles entirely. Regarding Herschel's claim that I have "escalated [my] anti-LaRouche activism, initiat[ed] more edit wars, and added a new tactic, a pattern of personal attacks and other egregious violations of Wikiquette," I hope you will ask for more evidence than one of them being called a troll. Slim 00:35, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * As Slim well knows, the material I inserted into the Dennis King article came from a site (www.ex-iwp.org) run by disaffected members of the International Workers Party, a leftist group. This site was the primary source for AndyL's contributions to the Lyndon LaRouche article. Apparently one of their members also writes for a magazine called "National Alliance", with which I was unfamiliar -- the name doesn't suggest much about their politics. Slim is resorting to a bit of transparent sophistry here, which is unfortunately typical of the tactics he is employing in his campaign.

 * I have now discovered that Slim is posting an announcement on the talk pages of other articles that I have edited, characterizing me as a person who uses Neo-Nazi, White Supremacist sources. I would like permission to delete these announcements as personal attacks. --H.K. 16:45, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * No, you are the one exercising sophistry. The article you used as a reference was the National Alliance, a white supremacist magazine. It was not an article by an ex-IWP member who also writes for them. Here is the article. Even after I pointed out to you that this was a white supremacist publication, you kept reverting to keep it in as a reference. It was only when Andyl also said it was not a reputable source that you backed down. A Google search for National Alliance brings up their own website as the very first item, saying that it brings news and commentary "from a white racial perspective". See here If you're saying you're using as references publications that you've never heard of, know nothing about, and that you don't even do a Google search to find out what they are, that's arguably even worse. And please do not insert your comments into the middle of other people's texts. I repeat: Please do not insert claims into articles without including reputable references. Slim 00:48, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Herschelkrustofsky, you keep inserting your comments into the middle of mine. Please don't do that. Put your responses AFTER each person's comment and I will do likewise. Otherwise you are effectively editing what they said. I have moved your coments so they are not inside mine. Please don't move them back again. Slim 22:37, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Dan Friedman, the person whose article was posted on the ex-IWP site, is indeed either a former or current member of the IWP. He has also produced plays written by Fred Newman at something called the Castillo Theater, and this year a musical entitled "Crown Heights", co-written by Friedman and Newman, was performed in New York. --H.K. 23:12, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I think the behaviour of Herschel, Weed Harper et al should be seen as a mitigating factor here. As well, if SlimVirgin is to be taken to task for "personal attacks" this should be treated as a new matter requiring a new ArbComm hearing rather than having disciplinary action meted out based on this talk page's arbitration case. There is a case to be made that Herschel, Weed et al are continuing the activity which led to the original ArbComm ruling but are simply being a bit more sophisticated about it. The goal remains the same, to subordinate certain wikipeadia articles to the intersts of the LaRouche movement either by trying to use them to promote LaRouche's ideas or, at a minimum, trying to neutralise damaging or embarassing information about LaRouche as well as attemping to discredit his critics such as King and Berelet by any means necessary. Adam Carr perhaps has a point when he complains that Wikipedia, at present, is not equipped to deal with such concerted campaigns - certainly some care should be taken to establish checks and balances that make it difficult for determined cadres to insert their group's propaganda throughout wikipedia. If a line is not drawn here with LaRouchians we will face an endless barrage of campaigns from every group under the sun be they LaRouchians, Scientologists, Moonies, Flat Earthers, or Raelians. AndyL 05:08, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * In response to this, I would like to point out that the LaRouche-related articles that I have edited were not authored by myself, but by opponents of LaRouche (Slim helpfully provided a list, above). I think of all the "concerted campaigns" I have seen, SlimVirgin's is the most obvious. I am in favor of "checks and balances that make it difficult for determined cadres to insert their group's propaganda throughout wikipedia," although I think that the NPOV policy ought to cover it. The belligerence of users like Slim and Adam ("If you want to ban me for saying all this, and for calling them trolls, so be it" is almost a word-for-word quote from something Adam posted recently) makes editing here very unpleasant, and I am going to put in another request for mediation. --H.K. 16:20, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * The extended edit wars that brought me to call for arbitration last spring, came to a dead stop on October 10 of this year, after protracted negotiations and compromise between AndyL and myself. This cessation of hostilities continued undisturbed until the arrival of SlimVirgin. I don't enjoy these conflicts, and the arbitration and mediation that I have been involved in has come about, without exception, at my own request. The idea that someone is goading Slim into personal attacks is reminiscent of the old tactic in rape trials, where the defense would claim that the victim was provocatively dressed. --H.K. 16:20, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I would have banned them from editing all articles which relate to LaRouche. I was overruled by the majority of the Committee. However, the policy on no personal attacks remains in place and as editors in good standing, if you attack them you may be subject to discipline, and in the case of repeated deliberate attacks, harsh discipline. Fred Bauder 12:18, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

 * Perhaps the way to proceed is to approach the ArbCom again for a new ruling based on these users' edit histories since the last ruling. I believe the motion to have them blocked from editing LaRouche-related material was only one vote short. In any event, as they're twisting everything I say, I'm going to delete their unreferenced claims without further discussion. I won't revert on sight, and I won't revert relevant edits where reputable publications are provided as references. Slim 00:48, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

"National Alliance"
I cited a page from an organization (www.ex-iwp.org) of former members of the International Workers Party. It turns out that one such former member, Dan Friedman, wrote an article, which appears on the ex-iwp website, that was published in a magazine called National Alliance, which is completely unrelated to the White Supremacist group with the same name. It is published by the New Alliance Party of Lenora Fulani (who is African-American). The New Alliance Party appears to be an IWP front. --H.K. 13:40, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)


text: User:Ilikea

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

title: User:Ilikea


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tredici

A card game invented last year. Not notable. Several Google hits, but they are Wiki-mirrors, or an inclusion on lists of invented games that direct back to the author's home page. I couldn't find any evidence that anyone outside his immediate circle is actually playing the game. Joyous 21:42, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * delete. Sounds interesting, but this is the wrong place. Ianb 21:49, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Direct author to pagat.com with best wishes. Isomorphic 04:29, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - original "research". -- Cyrius|✎ 02:02, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * And delete because of the copyright problem as well. Articles "used with permission" are not allowed. -- Cyrius|✎ 13:26, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep without reservation. Remember that other semi-obscure card game (last winter, or was it fall?) that turned out to be really worth keeping? 259 03:23, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Nice try, Mike, but Ambition's no more notable than this, and no more likely to pass VfD. Delete. Denni ☯ 18:43, 2004 Aug 1 (UTC)
 * Who is Mike? 259 21:34, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm (presumably) the Mike that Isomorphic is referring to. I say: Keep. 1> This is a fairly well-known game, according to my research. 2> He's trying to contribute positively to society, so lay off his back. 3> Never played tredici, but we shouldn't assume (as the Wikipedia cabal often do) that it sucks ass just because it's obscure. Mike Church 22:35, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, but do let me add one caveat: Jordon Kalilich should know that anything on Wikipedia becomes open source; if he doesn't want to relinquish the copyright to his game, he shouldn't post the rules here, and should ask for his deletion. That in mind, I redact my vote: I choose to delegate it to Mr. Kalilich. If he wishes to have the article deleted knowing that, then I change my vote. If he does not speak, then I say keep. Mike Church 22:39, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, because it's not notable. It's irrelevant whether or not the game is good or not. Wikipedia does not seek to scoop other sites or be the first to report "memes on the rise." Wikipedia does not seek to discover and promote worthy-but-little-known things that deserve to be better known. Whenever Tredici becomes important, someone can contribute an article on it. I haven't found, nor has anyone presented, evidence to convince me that Tredici is important yet. [[User:dpbsmith|dpbsmith (talk)]] 12:32, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tredici


text:
Brian Caswell

Brian Caswell (born 13 January 1954) is an Australian author of young adult fiction.

Biography
Brian Caswell was born in a village called Gwernaffield in Wales, on 13 January 1954. His family moved to England, when he was 5 years old. When he was 12, in 1966, Caswell's family moved to Australia. He received a Bachelor of Arts and a Diploma of Education, and graduated from the University of NSW. In the 1970s, Caswell took up singing and songwriting, and was successful for some years, one of his songs making the top 40 music charts and another winning a 'Golden Guitar' for song of the year. He became a school teacher in 1976, giving up performing, but continued writing songs.

Caswell taught at several high schools, mainly in the areas of history, English and creative writing. For 15 years he worked as a teacher and basketball coach. He began writing for the students he was teaching, publishing his first book, Merryll of the Stones, in 1989. He gave up teaching after his success of his first two books, and began to write full-time. He won the 1995 Children's Peace Literature Award for his book, Deucalion.

In 1998, he began working with friend and co-author David Chiem, to develop MindChamps – a company established to research the neuroscience and psychology of education and to develop engaging learning strategies in tune with the demands of the 21st century. Since 2007, he has written five books for parents and teachers on different aspects of education and the development of the learning mind.

Caswell lives in Fountaindale, New South Wales, with his wife, Marlene.

MindChamps
With 45 years of experience as a teacher, author, lecturer and creativity coach, Brian is the Dean of Research and Programme Development at MindChamps. Since MindChamps was founded in Sydney, Australia in 1998, David Chiem and Brian have worked with thousands of young people around the world, and advised and trained thousands more parents, trainers, teachers and education advisors to help them make a difference in the lives of the children under their care.

title: Brian Caswell


text:
Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra

The Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra or HUC (Hospitals of the University of Coimbra), is a university hospital that partners with the University of Coimbra, Portugal. This complex is known as a centre of research with a broad range of clinical services and medical specialties. It is a branch of the larger Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, a rebranded merged institution created during the eruption of the European sovereign debt crisis and the Portuguese economic and financial crisis in 2012.

History
In its early days, it used to function in two separated buildings which can be traced back to the 16th century. Part belonged to the College of St. Jerome begun in the 1560s. In 1836 it was handed over to the University of Coimbra, and twelve years later several hospital departments were transferred there. From then on it was known as the Hospital of St. Jerome. Several features bear witness to its history: the gateway built in the middle of the 18th century, which used to serve as the main entrance to the hospital and the great staircase built soon afterwards, remarkable not only for the elegance of its lines but also for the tiles that make up the side panel containing a variety of scenes set in a Rococo moulding.

The second building is the Royal College of Arts, which belonged to the Society of Jesus and was begun in 1568. The Coimbra High School was installed in this building in 1836 but in 1853 some hospital departments were transferred here. From 1870 onwards it was entirely given over to the hospital. In the late 1980s, these two old buildings were abandoned by the HUC services and are now patrimony of the University of Coimbra.

Nowadays the main centre of HUC operates in its own building, inaugurated in 1987 in Celas area of Coimbra. There are many other buildings of this hospital, dispersed around a large area in Coimbra, forming a huge Medical Centre.

In 2012, due to the European sovereign debt crisis and the Portuguese economic and financial crisis, the government merged the Coimbra University Hospitals with the Centro Hospitalar de Coimbra (C.H.C.) in order to reduce costs, fight overcapacity and unnecessary redundancy and create economic synergies for the state run hospitals operating in Coimbra.

The rebranded merged institution was then renamed C.H.U.C. - Centro Hospitalar Universitário de Coimbra.

title: Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra


text:
Democratic Party (Curaçao)

The Democratic Party (Partido Democraat, Democratische Partij) is a liberal party in Curaçao founded in 1944. The party has participated in elections for the Estates of the Netherlands Antilles (Curaçao constituency) and the Island Council of Curaçao until the dissolution of the Netherlands Antilles in 2010, obtaining a single seat in the island council in 2007.

By obtaining 1019 registrations of support, the party qualified (a minimum of 743 was required) for participation in the Curaçao General Election of 2012 on 19 October in a combined list with Laboral named Partido Democrat Laboral, where it obtained 1.2% of the votes but failed to obtain any seats. In the primary elections of 2016, the party received 1094 votes, again sufficient for participation, but did not end up winning any seats.

Election results
From 1954 until 1978, the party was part of the government of the Netherlands Antilles led by prime-minister Efrain Jonckheer, but it did not have any seats in the Estates of the Netherlands Antilles from 1995. At the legislative elections in the Netherlands Antilles, 18 January 2002, the party won 2.4% of the popular vote and none of the 14 Curaçao-seats in the Estates of the Netherlands Antilles. It took part in the elections of 27 2006 and 2010 where it obtained 3.7% and 2.5% of the vote of Curaçao respectively, but failed to win a seat.

In 2007, the party obtained a single seat in the island council (with 5% of the vote). At the Island Council elections of 2010, DP obtained 4% of the vote (3048 votes), about 500 votes shy of a seat in the Island Council (and its successor: the Estates of Curaçao).

title: Democratic Party (Curaçao)


text:
Royal International Air Tattoo

The Royal International Air Tattoo (RIAT) is the world's largest military air show, held annually in July, usually at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, England in support of The Royal Air Force Charitable Trust. The show typically attracts a total of 150,000 to 200,000 spectators over the weekend.

History
The first Air Tattoo was staged at North Weald Airfield in Essex in 1971, with just over 100 aircraft taking part. The event was founded by Paul Bowen and Timothy Prince, who were CAA air traffic controllers, and Air Marshal Sir Denis Crowley-Milling. From 1973 to 1983 it was held intermittently at RAF Greenham Common, initially under the title of the Royal Air Forces Association, South Eastern Area, Air Tattoo before moving to RAF Fairford in 1985. The show became the International Air Tattoo in 1976, and recognition of its unique status was granted by Elizabeth II in 1996, when the current Royal International Air Tattoo title was adopted.

 * The show took place at Fairford every two years until it became an annual show from 1993. Due to redevelopment work at RAF Fairford the show was held at RAF Cottesmore, Rutland in 2000 and 2001.
 * Guinness World Records have recognised RIAT 2003 as the world's largest ever military airshow, with 535 aircraft in attendance.
 * RIAT 2022 saw 266 aircraft from 33 nations on display, as the show returned from an extended hiatus due to COVID-19.

The event has had a number of air show firsts, including the first display and landing of the B-2A Spirit stealth bomber outside the United States of America during the 1997 "50 Years of the USAF" event and in 2008 the first landing of the Lockheed F-22 Raptor in Europe.

The RIAT has evolved into an important showcase for the world's military, taking place the week after the annual Global Air & Space Chiefs' Conference in London and the week before the bi-annual Farnborough Airshow which occurs in 'even' years. RIAT allows the military aerospace industry to showcase its products to both the general public and customers in a more relaxed environment outside the commercial selling pressure of the Farnborough trade show. The Farnborough show also restricts public attendance, in 2022 this was to a single day with free entry for under-21s to promote aerospace careers/recruitment.

As an extension to the Air Tattoo, Bowen and Price started the Flying Scholarship for Disabled People in 1983 in memory of Douglas Bader, who was a war hero and pilot despite losing his legs in an aerobatic crash. They have given over 400 scholarships to people with all types of disabilities and carry on the legacy of Bader.

2008 cancellation

The 2008 airshow was to feature two themes, the 90th Anniversary of the Royal Air Force and Global Engagement and was scheduled to be held on 12–13 July. The USAF Air Combat Command's F-22 Raptor Demo Team had made the first trans-Atlantic flight for the new stealth aircraft to participate in the show. On 11 July, the day before the air show opened to the public, Queen Elizabeth II presented, in poor weather conditions, new colours to the RAF and RAF Regiment in front of selected guests and VIPs. A week of heavy rainfall made the already-waterlogged car parks and parts of the airfield unusable. Safety concerns for the hundreds of thousands of expected visitors led the organisers to a last-minute cancellation of the public section of RIAT for the first time in the show's history.

RIAT 2009
RIAT 2009 was held on 18–19 July 2009. The show celebrated the 60th anniversary of NATO by charting its history in chronological order. The show also featured a Search and Rescue display to recognise the significance of missions undertaken by the aircraft and people that undertake these jobs. The show reportedly had over 160,000 spectators.

RIAT 2010
RIAT 2010 was held on 17–18 July 2010. The themes for the show were the 70th anniversary of the Battle of Britain, Training Aircraft and the 150th anniversary of Cadets. Nine members of the Royal Canadian Air Cadets and three members of the New Zealand Air Training Corps were invited to the event for the first time, as part of the International Air Cadet Exchange. The F-22 Raptor also appeared in its first RIAT flying display since 2008's cancelled show. Notable visitors to the 2010 show included James May and David Jason.

RIAT 2011
RIAT 2011 was held on 16–17 July 2011. This Air Tattoo looked back over the past four decades as it celebrated the show's 40th anniversary with a series of special aerial displays and ground entertainment. It also hosted a gathering of specially-decorated "Tiger" aircraft from the NATO Tiger Association. Tiger aircraft came from NATO squadrons that have a Tiger or Big Cat in their emblem and their association marked its 50th anniversary in 2011. RIAT 2011 saw a smaller crowd than usual of 138,000 attend the show. The pilot of the SoloTürk team, Murat Keleş was honoured with the highest award, the King Hussein Memorial Sword for the Best Overall Flying Demonstration.

RIAT 2012
RIAT 2012 was held on 7–8 July 2012. It saw the debut of the Black Eagles aerobatic team from South Korea and Japan became the 54th nation to participate in the tattoo with the arrival of one of its four Boeing KC-767Js operated by the Japan Air Self-Defense Force, which brought the JASDF Taiko Drummers to the show.

RIAT 2013
RIAT 2013 took place on 20–21 July 2013. Invitations of participation were distributed to over 70 countries. The programme featured an Airbus A400M Atlas and one of the first deliveries of the Airbus A380 to British Airways, both of which flew in formation with the Royal Air Force Red Arrows aerobatic team over the show weekend. RIAT 2013 was also notable due to the lack of U.S. military aircraft represented at the event, due to U.S. government sequestration.

RIAT 2014
RIAT 2014 took place 11–13 July 2014; the first time in its history that the show has been open to the public on a Friday. The Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II was to make its anticipated European debut but was grounded in the U. S. due to an engine failure before it could cross the Atlantic. Highlights of 2014's show included a pair of Polish Air Force Sukhoi Su-22 Fitters along with celebrations for the 50th display season of the Red Arrows.

RIAT 2015
RIAT 2015 was staged from 17–19 July 2015. The show's main theme was the celebration of 75 years since the Battle of Britain took place in the summer of 1940. RIAT 2015 also marked the last year of Avro Vulcan XH558's airworthiness, being retired later in the year. The show also paid tribute to 35 years of the Tri-National Tornado Training Establishment, with three aircraft performing flypasts over the weekend. Other participants included the Finnish Air Force F/A-18C Hornet, a British Airways Airbus A318 and the British debut of the Japanese Maritime Self Defence Force's Kawasaki P-1, which performed in the flying display, as well as the static park.

RIAT 2016
RIAT 2016 took place from the 8–10 July 2016. This show revolved around the latest generation of military aircraft types. The F-35 Lightning II (both the 'A' and 'B' variants) made its UK debut after its cancellation in 2014, and the Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor also made a rare appearance. Other acts included the Swedish Air Force Saab Gripen and French Air Force Dassault Rafale. Notable static display items included the Hellenic Air Force F-4 Phantom, the first UK airshow appearance of a German Air Force Airbus A400M and the last airshow appearance of the QinetiQ Alpha Jet.

RIAT 2017
RIAT 2017 took place between 14–17 July 2017. The show was a tribute to the 70th anniversary of the United States Air Force (USAF) and saw the return of the Thunderbirds demonstration team for the first time in 10 years. The show featured a special flypast from the USAF that included a C-130 Hercules, three F-15E Strike Eagles, two F-16 Fighting Falcons, a KC-135 Stratotanker and on the Sunday a special appearance from a B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. There was also a display from the F-22 Raptor on the Sunday of the show. A Sea King Helicopter from the Belgian Air Component performed a search and rescue demo.

The flying display also saw the Ukrainian Air Force Sukhoi Su-27 as a last minute addition as well as the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight Avro Lancaster bomber flying with three Spitfires and a Hurricane in a formation known as Thompson formation. Notable static displays included two F-4 Phantoms from the Hellenic Air Force, a second Ukrainian Su-27 and an Ilyushin Il-76. The USAF provided many aircraft for static including a B-1 Lancer, B-52 Stratofortress and a Lockheed U-2 reconnaissance aircraft.

RIAT 2018
RIAT 2018 was staged over 13–15 July 2018. The 2018 show featured 302 aircraft from 43 air arms and 30 nations, and featured a celebration of the centenary of the founding of the Royal Air Force. The show included a special "Dambusters Tribute Flypast" featuring an Avro Lancaster of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight accompanied by a Panavia Tornado and Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II aircraft, all operated by the No. 617 Squadron RAF. Other flying highlights included displays by the USAF Heritage Flight; a Ukrainian Air Force Sukhoi Su-27; a Royal Canadian Air Force McDonnell Douglas CF-18 Hornet; a French Aéronavale Dassault Rafale duo; the Italian Air Force's Frecce Tricolori aerobatic display team, and the RAF's Red Arrows. Visitors on Saturday were treated to a rare flypast by a USAF Northrop Grumman B-2 Spirit stealth bomber that had made the round trip from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, United States.

In the static aircraft display there were examples of aircraft from around the world including debut appearances by an Embraer KC-390 from Brazil, a Kawasaki C-2 from Japan and an HH-101A variant of the AgustaWestland AW101 tactical helicopter from the Italian Air Force.

RIAT 2019
RIAT 2019 was staged from 19–21 July 2019, with 245 aircraft in attendance. The theme for the 2019 show was 'Air and Space, inspiring the next generation air force' and Tim Peake was among the guest speakers. The show also celebrated the 70th anniversary of NATO. Notable appearances included the Turkish Air Force F-4 Phantom on static display, a flying display from the heavily upgraded Romanian Air Force MiG-21 LanceR-C, designed in the 1950s, and the Spanish Navy's EAV-8B Matador II Plus on flying display. 2019 marked the centenary of British Airways, and, as such, a British Airways Boeing 747 in BOAC livery performed a flypast in formation with the Red Arrows on the Saturday. Sunday saw another pair of flypasts, most notably from the Red Arrows and Patrouille de France, who flew together, both in their 'Concorde' formation, to mark 50 years since the aircraft's first flight. To celebrate the 70th anniversary of NATO, a flypast took place on both Friday and Saturday, consisting of many F-16s and Eurofighter Typhoons from different air arms, three USAF F-15s, and a French Air Force C-135 tanker.

RIAT 2020 & 2021 cancellations
RIAT 2020 was due to be staged from 17–19 July 2020, but was cancelled due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In its place a 'Virtual Air Tattoo' took place online that weekend, featuring content from past editions of the show as well as virtual displays from aerobatic teams in Digital Combat Simulator.

RIAT 2021 was scheduled to take place from 16–18 July 2021, and was due to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the show. However, it was cancelled for the second year running due to the continuing COVID-19 pandemic and the uncertainty of restrictions on both large crowds and international travel being in place by then.

RIAT 2022
After two years of being cancelled, RIAT 2022 was staged from 15–17 July 2022 and featured 266 aircraft. The show heavily focused on training aircraft as this years operational theme was 'Training the Next Generation Air Force' but it also focused on the 75th Anniversary of the USAF, which included a rare appearance of the Boeing E-4 performing a flypast on the Friday and being on static display over the weekend. The Airbus BelugaXL made its Air Tattoo debut on the Saturday, performing two flypasts. One of the special guests of this year was actor Tom Cruise.

RIAT 2023
RIAT 2023 was staged from 14–16 July 2023. The theme for RIAT 2023 was SKYTANKER23, focusing on aircraft capable of performing air-to-air refuelling as 2023 is the centenary of the first air-to-air refuelling. Also the 100th anniversary of the Italian Air Force was celebrated with a high number of aircraft. Heavy rain and high winds saw the cancellation of many of the planned flying displays on Friday and Saturday, with the "star" of the show, a replica Messerschmitt Me 262, making its only flying appearance on Sunday. Further highlights where the return of an Italian A-129 Mangusta, a Spanish Navy McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II, a rare appearance of an American WC-130J Weatherbird, and the return of the Al Fursan display team from the UAE since their last appearance in 2012.

RIAT 2024
RIAT 2024 is to be staged from 19–21 July 2024. The main theme will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the F-16 Fighting Falcon with other themes commemorating the 75th anniversary of NATO and the 100th anniversary of the Royal Canadian Air Force.

Mid-air collision at IAT 1993
On 24 July 1993, two MiG-29 Fulcrums of the Russian Air Force collided in mid-air and crashed away from the public. No one was hurt. After ejecting, the two pilots landed safely. Investigators later determined that pilot error was the cause, after one pilot did a reverse loop and disappeared into the clouds, the other one lost sight of his wingman and aborted the routine.

2002 Italian Air Force accident
In 2002 a G-222 of the Italian Air Force made a hard landing after demonstrating a steep descent approach, also known as the "Sarajevo approach", developed for the airbridge for supplying Sarajevo during its blockade in the Bosnian War. After initial touchdown the aircraft bounced up and came back heavily on the nose wheel, which then collapsed. The crew evacuated the aircraft safely and the show was paused while the runway was cleared of the damaged aircraft.

title: Royal International Air Tattoo


text:
User talk:Rustybill83

Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. Can you tell me if the language in Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center Shreveport is your own wording, or copied from another source? Wikipedia can't stay viable if copyrighted material from other sources is posted here. If it's your own words, please see Manual of style on how to format the article to the Wikipedia standard. If it's a copy, it will have to be deleted in order to remove the copyright violation from the Wikipedia history. Please don't look at this as a biting the newbie thing, but just trying to make sure that we have valid articles. RickK 21:48, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rustybill83


text:
Hermenegild

Saint Hermenegild or Ermengild (died 13 April 585; San Hermenegildo; Hermenegildus, from Gothic 𐌹𐍂𐌼𐌿𐌽𐌰𐌲𐌹𐌻𐌳𐍃 *Airmana-gild, "immense tribute"), was the son of King Liuvigild of the Visigothic Kingdom in the Iberian Peninsula and southern France. He fell out with his father in 579, then revolted the following year. During his rebellion, he converted from Arianism to Chalcedonian Christianity. Hermenegild was defeated in 584 and exiled. His death was later celebrated as a martyrdom due to the influence of Pope Gregory I's Dialogues, in which he portrayed Hermenegild as a "Catholic martyr rebelling against the tyranny of an Arian father."

Marriage to Ingund
Hermenegild was the eldest son of Liuvigild and his first wife. He was a brother of Reccared I and brought up an Arian. Liuvigild made his sons co-regents.

In 579, he married Ingund, the daughter of the Frankish King Sigebert I of Austrasia who was a Chalcedonian. Her mother was the Visigoth princess Brunhilda of Austrasia. The twelve-year-old Ingund was pressured by Hermenegild's stepmother Goiswintha to abjure her beliefs, but she stayed firm in her faith.

Liuvigild sent Hermenegild to the south to govern on his behalf. There, he came under the influence of Leander of Seville, the older brother of Isidore of Seville. Hermenegild was converted to Chalcedonian Christianity. His family demanded for him to return to Arianism, but he refused.

Around then, he led a revolt against Liuvigild. Contemporary accounts attribute that to politics, rather than primarily religious differences. He asked for the aid of the Byzantine Empire, but it was occupied with defending itself from territorial incursions by the Sasanian Empire. For a time, Hermenegild had the support of the Suebi, who had been defeated by Liuvigild in 579, but he forced them to capitulate once again in 583.

Hermenegild fled to Seville and when it fell to a siege in 584, he went to Córdoba. After Liuvigild paid 30,000 pieces of gold, the Byzantines withdrew and took Ingund and her son with them.

Hermenegild sought sanctuary in a church. Liuvigild would not violate the sanctuary. He sent Reccared inside to speak with Hermenegild and to offer peace. That was accepted, and peace was made for some time.

Imprisonment and death
Goiswintha, however, brought about another alienation within the family. Hermenegild was imprisoned in Tarragona or Toledo. During his captivity in the tower of Seville, an Arian bishop was sent to Hermenegild for Easter but he would not accept the Eucharist from him. King Liuvigild ordered him beheaded; he was executed on 13 April 585.

He had one son by his wife named Athanagild after his matrilineal great-grandfather king Athanagild. They both tried to seek refuge in Constantinople after his execution, but it was refused while they were already in Sicily. She then returned to the Frankish Kingdom, where her son remained under her and her mother's custody.

Reputation and legacy
Hermenegild's reputation as a Catholic martyr is not present in contemporary Spanish accounts, such as John of Biclaro's Chronicon continuans Victorem Tunnunensem and Isidore of Seville's Historia de regibus Gothorum, Vandalorum et Suevorum, which mention only his revolt and not his conversion. The French chronicler Gregory of Tours, in his Decem Libri Historiarum, recounts Hermenegild's conversion and credits it as the cause of his rebellion; however, he judges Hermenegild harshly as a traitor. Of Hermenegild, Gregory wrote: "Poor prince, he did not realize that the judgment of God hangs over anyone who makes such plans against his own father, even if that father be a heretic." It is the Italian Pope Gregory I who first identifies Hermenegild as a martyr. Writing in his Dialogues, Pope Gregory states that Hermenegild was killed after refusing communion from an Arian bishop. Pope Gregory credited Hermenegild's death as inspiring his brother Reccared's conversion, and thus the conversion of the Visigoth kingdom, saying that Reccared "could never have effected all this, if king Hermigildus had not died for the testimony of true religion; for, as it is written: Unless the grain of wheat falling into the earth doth die, itself remaineth alone; but if it die it bringeth forth much fruit." It is chiefly on Pope Gregory's assessment that Hermenegild's subsequent legacy rests.

As a Catholic martyr, Hermenegild rose to prominence in Spain during the period following the Reconquista, during which time there was renewed interest in the Visigothic "golden age". In 1585, at the urging of Philip II of Spain, Pope Sixtus V authorized the cult of Hermenegild in Spain; recognition was later extended to the whole church by Pope Urban VIII. Saint Hermenegild became celebrated through artistic representation such as poetry, painting, and plays. One example of this is El mártir del sacramento, San Hermenegildo, a Eucharistic play written in the 1680s by the Mexican nun Juana Inés de la Cruz. Another example is the Italian Cardinal Francesco Sforza Pallavicino's 1644 tragedy Ermenegildo martire, which is considered a masterpiece of seventeenth-century Jesuit hagiographical drama. Francisco de Herrera the Younger's 1654 painting The Triumph of St. Hermenegild, originally for the Church of the Discalced Carmelites in Madrid, is now in the collection of the Museo del Prado.

In art and Catholic Iconography, Saint Hermenegild is depicted with an ax as well as a crown, sword, and cross. Hermenegild's entry in the Roman Martyrology, translated to English, reads: "In Seville, Spain, St. Hermenegild, Martyr. He was the son of Liuvigild, the Arian king of the Visigoths. He was imprisoned when he confessed the Catholic faith. When he refused to take communion from the Arian bishop during the Easter service, his perfidious father ordered that he be brought down with an axe. Thus he left this earthly realm and entered Heaven as a king and martyr." Hermenegild's feast day is April 13. He is the patron of the "Real Hermandad de Veteranos de las Fuerzas Armadas y la Guardia Civil" ("Royal Brotherhood of Veterans of the Armed Forces and the Civil Guard") in Spain. The Royal and Military Order of Saint Hermenegild, established by Ferdinand VII of Spain in 1814, is also named in his honor.

Parentage
According to the 9th-century Chronicle of Alfonso III, Erwig was the son of Ardabast, who had journeyed from the Byzantine Empire to Hispania during the time of Chindasuinth, and married Chindasuinth's niece Goda. Ardabast (or Artavasdos), was probably an Armenian or Persian Christian exile in Constantinople or in Byzantine Africa. In Hispania he was made a count.

17th-century Spanish genealogist Luis Bartolomé de Salazar y Castro gave Ardabast's father as Athanagild, the son of Saint Hermenegild and Ingund, and his mother as Flavia Juliana, a daughter of Peter Augustus and niece of the Emperor Maurice. This imperial connection is disputed by Christian Settipani, who says that the only source for Athanagild's marriage to Flavia Julia is José Pellicer, who he claims to be a forger.

title: Hermenegild


text:
Teen Titans (TV series)

Teen Titans is an American animated superhero television series created by Glen Murakami and developed by Murakami, David Slack and Sam Register. Based on DC Comics's superhero team Teen Titans, it was produced by Warner Bros. Animation, and DC Entertainment (for season 5). The show premiered on Cartoon Network on July 19, 2003; its first two seasons also aired on Kids' WB. Initially, only four seasons were planned, but the popularity of the series led to Cartoon Network's ordering a fifth season. The final half-hour episode of the show, "Things Change", aired on January 16, 2006; it was later followed by a TV movie, Teen Titans: Trouble in Tokyo, that premiered on September 15 the same year, serving as the series finale. A 15-minute episode titled "The Lost Episode" was released as part of an online promotional campaign by Post Consumer Brands in January 2005.

Teen Titans became one of Cartoon Network's most popular series, renowned for its humor, storylines, and banter between the main characters. During its run, the series was nominated for three Annie Awards and one Motion Picture Sound Editors Award. Spin-off media included comics, DVD releases, video games, music albums, and collectible toys. In 2013, the show spawned a spin-off, titled Teen Titans Go!, which received a theatrical film that was released on July 27, 2018, titled Teen Titans Go! To the Movies. In 2019, a crossover film with Teen Titans Go! was released, titled Teen Titans Go! vs. Teen Titans. It features the first appearance of the original series characters after 13 years.

The series was first shown on Boomerang from February 2, 2009, replacing the Super Friends until October 31, 2010. It returned to Boomerang's line-up on October 3, 2011, and left the schedule again on June 1, 2014.

Premise
Teen Titans is based primarily on stories by Marv Wolfman and George Pérez from the 1980s, featuring characters, storylines, and concepts introduced during the run, and incorporating a similar group of members. The five main members of the eponymous team in the series are Robin (Scott Menville), the intelligent and capable leader of the Teen Titans; Starfire (Hynden Walch), a quirky, curious alien princess from the planet Tamaran; Cyborg (Khary Payton), a half-human/half-robot cyborg who is known for his strength and technological prowess; Raven (Tara Strong), a stoic girl from the parallel world Azarath who draws upon dark energy and psionic abilities; and Beast Boy (Greg Cipes), a good-natured joker who can transform into various animals. They are situated in Titans Tower, a large T-shaped building featuring living quarters, a command center, and a variety of training facilities on an island just offshore from the West Coast metropolis of Jump City. The team deals with all manner of criminal activity and threats to the city, while dealing with their own struggles with adolescence, their mutual friendships, and their limitations.

The first season focuses on the Teen Titans' introduction to the mysterious supervillain Slade (Ron Perlman), who seeks to turn Robin into his apprentice. The second season is an adaptation of "The Judas Contract" storyline where new hero Terra (Ashley Johnson) joins the team while secretly plotting against them with Slade. The third season depicts Cyborg's conflict with the evil organization H.I.V.E. and their leader Brother Blood (John DiMaggio), prompting Cyborg to form the superhero team Titans East with Aqualad (Wil Wheaton), Speedy (Mike Erwin), Bumblebee (T'Keyah Crystal Keymáh), and Más y Menos (Freddy Rodriguez). In the fourth season, Raven finds herself unwillingly involved in a plot that threatens the existence of the world when her demon father Trigon (Kevin Michael Richardson) seeks to enslave the Earth. For the fifth season, the Teen Titans join forces with numerous other heroes to combat the Brotherhood of Evil, Beast Boy's longtime adversaries, and their army of villains.

Main

 * Scott Menville as Robin
 * Hynden Walch as Starfire
 * Khary Payton as Cyborg
 * Tara Strong as Raven
 * Greg Cipes as Beast Boy

Secret identities
Unlike most other superhero television series, the Teen Titans characters maintain their superhero identities at all times, with any hints at the concept of an alter ego or secret identity rarely explored.

"It was really important to me that little kids watching it could identify with characters. And I thought that the minute you start giving them secret identities then kids couldn't project themselves onto the characters anymore. And that was important to me. I know it's kind of important to have secret identities and stuff like that but we wanted everything to be really, really, iconic. Like, 'Oh, there's the robot guy. There's the alien girl. There's the witch girl. There's the shape-changing boy. There's the…' We just wanted it really clean like that. We wanted it like old Star Trek. We just wanted it simple…

…And the whole 'Who's Robin?' controversy is really kind of interesting to me. My big concern is just trying to make Robin cool. And just really set Robin apart from Batman. So if it seems like I'm avoiding the question, I sort of am. Because I don't think it's really important. My concern is how do I make Robin a really strong lead character without all that other stuff. And I feel that way about all the characters. How can I keep all the characters really iconic and really clean."

The secret identity of Robin, an alias assumed by multiple characters in the comics, is never explicitly revealed in the series. However, several hints are provided to suggest he is Dick Grayson, the original Robin and founding member of the Teen Titans:
 * Robin's alternate dimensional counterpart Larry in the episode "Fractured" is named Nosyarg Kcid—"Dick Grayson" spelled backwards.
 * Robin's future counterpart in the episode "How Long Is Forever?" has taken on the identity of Nightwing, Grayson's second superhero alias.
 * The main romance in the show is Robin's relationship with Starfire, whom Grayson would romance in the comics.
 * A glimpse into Robin's consciousness by Raven in the episode "Haunted" shows the memory of two acrobats falling from a trapeze, a reference to the death of Grayson's acrobat parents being the catalyst for him becoming Robin.
 * Further connections to the Batman mythos include two references in the episode "The Apprentice, Pt. II", when Robin responds to a suggestion by the villain Slade that he "might be like a father to [him]" with "I already have a father" (which transitions to a shot of flying bats) and a fight scene on the rooftop of a building labeled Wayne Enterprises.

The Teen Titans Go! episode "Permanent Record" would satirize the mystery of Robin's identity by explicitly giving his name as "Robin v.3: Tim Drake" (the third Robin), with "Dick Grayson" and "Jason Todd" (the second Robin) being written over. Subsequent episodes, however, establish him as Dick Grayson through vague flashbacks to his boyhood at Haley Circus.

In the comics, Starfire and Raven are the real names of their respective characters. While the show does not specify this with the latter, the former acknowledges "Starfire" as the English translation of her name in the season 5 episode "Go!" and her native name, Koriand'r, is used in the season 3 episode "Betrothed". The comic versions of these characters, however, also use the civilian aliases Kory Anders and Rachel Roth, which are not used on the show.

The policy of not mentioning the characters' secret identities would be broken in the season 5 premiere "Homecoming" when Elasti-Girl refers to Beast Boy by his real name, Garfield. Cyborg's real name in the comics, Victor Stone, is referenced in the season 3 premiere "Deception" when he uses "Stone" as an undercover alias, although the series does not identify this as his real name.

Soundtrack
The series is known for featuring both an English and Japanese version of its title theme song, created by Andy Sturmer and performed by the Japanese band Puffy AmiYumi. The title theme used in the regions where the show was broadcast varied; some would play only one version, while Japan - and the English language video editions - would use both, according to the respective episode's plot theme: the English lyrics for more serious stories, the Japanese version for more comedic tones.

The first-season episode "Mad Mod" also featured another song by Puffy AmiYumi, "K2G". In the feature-length film Trouble in Tokyo, a literal translation of the Japanese song, whose actual lyrics differ greatly from its English counterpart, is performed for comedic effect.

Cancellation
In mid-November 2005, TitansTower.com reported that prospects for a sixth season were looking extremely unlikely, and fans were urged to express their support for the show to Cartoon Network. Several days after this initial posting, word came that Cartoon Network had officially terminated the show. According to Wil Wheaton, the actor who provided the voice of Aqualad, the series was terminated by new Warner Bros. Animation executives, who made the decision not to renew the series based on its sixth season pitch. Wheaton's story was contradicted by series story editor Rob Hoegee, who stated that the decision came from Cartoon Network, not WB, and that the crew was informed during the writing phase of season five that there were no plans for a sixth season. The show's producer David Slack indicated that he was given different reasons for the show's cancellation; either the ratings dropped after the "scary" season 4, or Mattel wanted the show dead because Bandai had the show's toy deal. Cartoon Network announced that Mattel had become its "master toy licensee" in 2006.

After the last episode, Warner Bros. Animation released a feature film titled Teen Titans: Trouble in Tokyo. The film premiered at San Diego Comic-Con International and was shown on Cartoon Network first on September 15, 2006, before airing on Kids' WB on September 16, and finally releasing on DVD on February 6, 2007.

Proposed spin-off
As early as August 2006, there were reports that Teen Titans may undergo a re-branding, with producer Glen Murakami citing the 1995 hiatus of Batman: The Animated Series, which was retooled in 1997 as The New Batman Adventures. According to Rob Hoegee, this had been suggested by Sam Register after he and David Slack had left the show, leaving Glen Murakami and Amy Wolfram to develop a proposal for a new show that would have expanded the team with all the new characters introduced in Season 5. However, when they had sent the pitch in, it was ultimately declined.

According to reports, the new show would have been titled New Teen Titans, and rather than focusing on the original five, would have featured a rotating cast, like Justice League Unlimited, working from 5 separate headquarters linked together by a communications system designed by Cyborg. Some of these proposed teamups included:

 * Robin, Speedy, Aqualad, Kid Flash (a tribute to the original Titans from the comic book)
 * Kid Flash, Mas y Menos
 * Wildebeest, Jericho, Gnarkk
 * Hotspot, Kilowatt, Redstar
 * Raven, Starfire, Kole, Argent, Bumblebee, Pantha (in a story titled "Truth or Dare")

The show was slated to introduce new villains, notably one named "Athena" who had the Midas touch and was accompanied by an ever changing roster of superpowered suiters as well as a posse of robot girls, and see the return of fan favorites from the original series, such as Mad Mod (in a story titled "The Mad Mods"), Control Freak ("The Battle of the Geeks"), and Soto ("Planet Soto"). Series artist, Brianne Drouhard, has also stated doing visual development on a character that wasn't mentioned in the reporting. Murakami also expressed interest in using Phobia, Mister Twister, and Ravager.

The pitch documents included information on a holiday episode, as well as a plot line in which Herald would unknowingly create a rift in "DIMENSION X", allowing a microscopic, freeloading creature to travel with them to Earth. The creature multiplies exponentially, and in the end the New Teen Titans must battle the creature and repair the rift. According to series artist Derrick J. Wyatt, this would have tied back to the original show, and the unnamed creature from the series finale, "Things Change".

Crossover with Teen Titans Go!
A mid-credits scene from Teen Titans Go! To the Movies featured the 2003 Titans' return, in which Robin states they've "found a way back".

In 2019, Warner Bros. released a crossover film featuring the Titans from both shows, titled Teen Titans Go! vs. Teen Titans. The film premiered at the San Diego Comic-Con on July 21, followed by a digital release on September 24 and a DVD and Blu-ray release on October 15. The events of the film take place during the fifth season of Teen Titans Go!.

Legacy
The series was revisited as a series of shorts in 2012 for the DC Nation programming block on Cartoon Network. Dubbed New Teen Titans, the shorts began airing on September 11. The shorts featured the Titans in chibi form, with the principal cast members of the original series returning.

Ciro Nieli, one of the show's directors, would go on to create Disney's Super Robot Monkey Team Hyperforce Go!, another superhero action show with a large anime influence, but premiered in 2004 on Jetix, and featured Beast Boy's voice actor Greg Cipes as the voice of Chiro, the show's main protagonist. Sam Register, producer of the series, also made his own show in 2004 with Hi Hi Puffy AmiYumi on Cartoon Network, which was based on the pop duo who did the theme song, and also had an anime influence, but was created more to be a slapstick comedy in the veins of Looney Tunes and Tom and Jerry.

Teen Titans Go!  was announced as a spin-off, with many voices the same, but not significantly related in terms of story to both the Teen Titans series and the New Teen Titans shorts. The series premiered on April 23, 2013.

Menville, Payton, Strong, Cipes, and Walch reprised their respective character roles as Robin, Cyborg, Raven, Beast Boy, Starfire and Blackfire in DC Super Hero Girls.

Payton reprised his role as Cyborg in Lego DC Comics: Batman Be-Leaguered, Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: Justice League vs. Bizarro League, Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: Justice League – Attack of the Legion of Doom, Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: Justice League – Cosmic Clash, Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: Justice League – Gotham City Breakout along with Cipes, Walch, and Menville (although he played the Damian Wayne Robin), Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: The Flash, and Lego DC Comics Super Heroes: Aquaman – Rage of Atlantis. He has also reprised his role as Cyborg on Justice League Action.

Several character details from Teen Titans, like Raven's standard incantation Azarath Metrion Zinthos and Beast Boy's super-werewolf form from the episode "The Beast Within", were incorporated into the animated film Justice League vs. Teen Titans.

Impact on DC continuity
Teen Titans has never been established to be a part of the larger DC Animated Universe or The Batman animated series. Series producer Bruce Timm said the series would not cross over with Justice League Unlimited. Despite this, the series was alluded to in the Static Shock episode "Hard as Nails", where Static asked Batman where Robin was, to which Batman responded, "With the Titans...You'll meet them some day". The character Speedy, who first appeared in the episode "Winner Take All", later appeared in Justice League Unlimited with the same costume design and voice actor (Mike Erwin) as the Teen Titans incarnation (though he is older in appearance). Kid Flash was voiced by Michael Rosenbaum in his appearances in the show, who was the same actor who voiced the Flash in Justice League Unlimited; both characters are the Wally West incarnations. The follow-up series, Teen Titans Go!, has featured several appearances by Batman, but they have all been non-speaking appearances. Both Batman and Alfred Pennyworth appear in DC Nation's New Teen Titans "Red X Unmasked". In the season 2 episode of Teen Titans Go!, "Let's Get Serious", Aqualad (voiced by Khary Payton), Superboy, and Miss Martian of the Young Justice team appear.

Much like the DC Animated Universe (as well as X-Men: Evolution and Spider-Man and His Amazing Friends), the series has affected the comics that initially inspired it, including: Beast Boy adopting the series' purple and black outfit during DC's "52" storyline and later appearing with the pointed ears and fanged teeth originated by the series, future Cyborg having the same armor pattern of his animated counterpart in the Titans Tomorrow storyline, Raven adapting her animated counterpart's costume design in the "One Year Later" storyline, the characters Más Y Menos making appearances in 52 and the Final Crisis limited series, the character Joto was renamed "Hotspot" during 52 to match his cartoon counterpart, and the villain Cinderblock appearing in a fight with the comic incarnation of the Titans. Red X is later included in the mainstream comic publications through the two-issue teaser comic Future State Teen Titans and its follow-up series Teen Titans Academy.

Reception
Early into the series' run, Executive Producer and Cartoon Network and Warner Bros. Animation Vice President Sam Register responded to criticism regarding the style of the show with a statement slightly contradicting Murakami's statement about wanting Robin to "be cool" with his metal-tipped boots: "Justice League is awesome and Samurai Jack is awesome and we buy a lot of anime shows that are great, but those shows really are directed more towards the nine to fourteen age group, and the six and seven and eight-year-olds were not gelling with the Justice League and some of the more of the fanboy shows... The main mission was making a good superhero show for kids. Now if the fanboys happen to like the Teen Titans also, that's great, but that was not our mission."

However, while the series' creators initially stated that younger children were the intended audience for the series, Teen Titans Go! writer J. Torres notes that the progression and deeper themes of the show widened the appeal to a much broader audience: "... [The show] started out skewed a lot younger... but along the way, I think the producers discovered it was reaching a wider audience. ... [the show] got into some darker story lines, and they introduced a lot more characters, so they expanded on it, and they let the show evolve with the audience." In 2009, Teen Titans was named the 83rd best animated series by IGN.

TVLine lists the theme song from the series among the best animated series themes of all time.

Awards and nominations

 * 2005 Annie Awards
 * Outstanding Storyboarding in an Animated Television Production (Nominated)

 * 2004 Annie Awards
 * Outstanding Music in an Animated Television Production (Nominated)
 * Outstanding Storyboarding in an Animated Television Production (Nominated)

 * 2004 Motion Picture Sound Editors Awards:
 * Best Sound Editing in Television Animation (Nominated)

Comics
From 2004 to 2008, DC Comics published a comic book series based on Teen Titans called Teen Titans Go!. The series was written by J. Torres and Todd Nauck, Larry Stucker was the regular illustrator. The series focuses on Robin, Raven, Starfire, Beast Boy, and Cyborg who are the main cast members of the television series. While the comic's stories stand independently, its issues were done so as not to contradict events established in the animated series' episodes. Often, Teen Titans Go! also referenced episodes of the show, as well as expanding on parts of the series.

On July 10, 2024, DC Comics published comic book series named Primer: Clashing Colors that features this iteration of the Teen Titans. It is written by Thomas Krajewski and Jennifer Muro, illustrated by Gretel Lusky. The comic focuses on Ashley Rayburn putting her powers to the test in order to be put on the team with the rest of the main cast.

Toys
Bandai released a line of action figures based on the Teen Titans animated series. The line included 1.5 inch "Comic Book Hero" mini figures, 3.5 inch action figures (including "Teen Titans Launch Tower Playset", "Teen Titans Command Center", "Battling Machines", "T-Vehicles", "T-Sub Deluxe Vehicles"), 5 inch action figures, 6.5 inch plush Super-D Toys, and 10 inch figures. Amongst the characters included in the line were the main members of the Teen Titans, Titans East, and various allies and villains.

Video games
Teen Titans is a video game released on October 16, 2005 for the Game Boy Advance. It was the first video game adaptation based on the animated television series. The plot of the game followed Brother Blood having stolen copies of the Titans' DNA to create a clone army. Playable characters featured the main cast, Robin, Raven, Beast Boy, Starfire, and Cyborg. A console version of the game and a sequel titled Teen Titans 2 was released in 2006.

 Movies

On July 21, 2019, the DC animated film Teen Titans Go! vs. Teen Titans features the main cast of Teen Titans along with the one of Teen Titans Go! in a crossover where both versions must fight villains from their respective worlds.

The DC animated film Justice League: Crisis on Infinite Earths – Part Three is the third and final part of a trilogy, it was released July 16, 2024. It contains a cameo where the Titans Tower from the animated series can be momentarily seen.

title: Teen Titans (TV series)


text:
Authentic Radical Liberal Party

The Authentic Radical Liberal Party (Partido Liberal Radical Auténtico or PLRA) is a liberal and radical political party in Paraguay. The party is a full member of Liberal International. The liberales, as they are known, are the leading opposition to the dominant conservative Colorado Party. They have taken this position since the end of the Alfredo Stroessner dictatorship in 1989. They are the political successors of the Liberal Party, which traces its history back to 10 July 1887.

The party was formed by Domingo Laíno, Carmen Casco de Lara Castro, Carlos Alberto González, Miguel Ángel Martínez Yaryes, and others in 1978, in opposition to the Constitutional Amendment of 1977 which imposed no term limits to the re-election of the Paraguayan president. The PLRA remained officially unrecognized from its foundation in 1978 until the overthrow of Alfredo Stroessner. During this time, PLRA activists suffered continual harassment.

In the presidential elections of 2008, the party achieved victory over the Colorado Party for the first time in 61 years through a political alliance headed by leftist Fernando Lugo and composed by other left-wing political parties. At the 2008 legislative elections, the party won 26 seats in the Chamber of Deputies and 14 seats in the Senate. They were approximately tied with the Colorados in the number of seats won in the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate.

Following the June 2012 impeachment of Fernando Lugo, which the PLRA spearheaded, the governing alliance fell apart, and Vice-President Federico Franco took over the presidency, thus exercising the first all-PLRA government in Paraguay. The PLRA has remained in opposition since 2013. As one of Paraguay’s two traditional parties, the PLRA is notable for its lack of a clear political program, which is a reflection of its division into personalist factions, dominated by networks of national and local caudillos.

title: Authentic Radical Liberal Party


text:
Paul Korir

Paul Kipketer Korir (born July 15, 1977, in Kipkoror, near Lessos, Nandi District in the Rift Valley Province) is a middle distance athlete from Kenya.

Biography
He graduated from Kilibwoni High School in Nandi District in 1996. He has started running seriously a year earlier. In 2000 he finished 2nd at an athletics meeting in Kakamega and was spotted by Moses Tanui and was signed by Fila club managed by Federico Rosa. In 2001 he switched to KIM club. He made an international breakthrough in 2003, winning gold medal at the All-Africa Games and 2003 World Athletics Final.

In the run up to the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens, Greece he was ranked world number three behind Hicham El Guerrouj and Bernard Lagat which would have given him a good medal chance had he not been dropped from the Kenyan Olympics team after finishing only fourth in his country's Olympic trials.

Korir used to attend the PACE Sports Management training camp in Kaptagat. He is managed by Ricky Simms and coached by Jimmy Beauttah. He is married and has a daughter born in 2002.

He is not to be confused with Paul Atudonyang Korir a Kenyan marathon runner.

Achievements
1500 m Major achievements
 * 2003
 * 2003 All-Africa Games - Abuja, Nigeria.
 * gold medal
 * 2003 World Athletics Final
 * winner
 * 2004
 * 2004 IAAF World Indoor Championships - Budapest, Hungary.
 * gold medal
 * 2004 African Championships - Brazzaville, Republic of the Congo.
 * gold medal

title: Paul Korir