text:
Pratt & Whitney J58

The Pratt & Whitney J58 (company designation JT11D-20) is an American jet engine that powered the Lockheed A-12, and subsequently the YF-12 and the SR-71 aircraft. It was an afterburning turbojet engine with a unique compressor bleed to the afterburner that gave increased thrust at high speeds. Because of the wide speed range of the aircraft, the engine needed two modes of operation to take it from stationary on the ground to 2000 mph at altitude. It was a conventional afterburning turbojet for take-off and acceleration to Mach 2 and then used permanent compressor bleed to the afterburner above Mach 2. The way the engine worked at cruise led it to be described as "acting like a turboramjet". It has also been described as a turboramjet based on incorrect statements describing the turbomachinery as being completely bypassed.

The engine performance that met the mission requirements for the CIA and USAF over many years was later enhanced slightly for NASA experimental work (carrying external payloads on the top of the aircraft), which required more thrust to deal with higher aircraft drag.

Origins
The J58, company designation JT11, had its origins in the larger JT9 (J91) engine. It was a 3/4 scale JT9 with a mass flow of 300 lb/s, down from 400 lb/s. The JT11 was proposed to the US Navy under their designation J58. It was also proposed for various Navy and Air Force aircraft, e.g. Convair F-106, North American F-108, Convair B-58C, Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III, and North American A3J Vigilante, but none of these applications followed.

The J58 began development for the US Navy to power the planned Martin P6M jet flying boat. The P6M started out using Allison J71-A-4 engines and then switched to the Pratt & Whitney J75, due to J58 development delays. Upon cancellation of the P6M, it was selected for the Convair Kingfish and for the Lockheed A-12, YF-12A and SR-71. Other sources link its origin to the USAF's requirement for a powerplant for the WS-110A, the future XB-70 Valkyrie.

Re-design for Mach 3.2

Analytical calculations of the performance of the original J58 showed three problems at Mach 2.5: "exhaust pressure was equal to the inlet pressure, the compressor was deep in surge, and there was no cool air to the afterburner liner that would therefore melt".

The first problem was caused by excessive compressor delivery temperatures, which did not allow enough energy to be added in the engine combustor to provide any thrust from the gas generator. All the thrust-producing pressure in the jet-pipe came from ram, as with a ramjet, and none from the gas generator. Fuel for thrust could only be added in the afterburner, which became the only source of engine thrust. The speed at which the gas generator produced no thrust was raised from about Mach 2.5 to about Mach 3 by patented design changes. Beyond that speed, the gas generator would become a drag item with, at Mach 3.2, a pressure ratio of 0.9. Even minimum afterburner would not balance the drag. The effect was described qualitatively by Lockheed inlet designer David Campbell "..with minimum afterburner the engine would be dragging on the engine mounts at high Mach numbers."

The second problem (the compressor deep in surge) was caused by the compressor trying to operate at too-low a corrected speed in an area of its compressor map known as "off-design". The third problem was caused by the afterburner duct being cooled with too-hot turbine exhaust gas.

describes the changes to the engine that extended the engine's capability to Mach 3.2. They included diverting 20% of the compressor entry air after the 4th compressor stage directly to the afterburner through six external tubes. This allowed the compressor to work properly with adequate surge margin and increased airflow into the compressor. Some of the increased flow left the compressor after the 4th stage as bypass to the afterburner, and some left the last compressor stage through the previously choked area. The increased airflow gave more thrust. The inlet guide vanes were modified with trailing-edge flaps to reduce blade flutter and prevent blade fatigue failures. The afterburner was cooled by the bleed air that was 400 F-change cooler than the turbine exhaust gas. Not all the oxygen in the bleed air was available for combustion, as most of the bleed air was directed into the cooling shroud before entering the afterburner cavity for reheating. The improved afterburner cooling allowed a higher flame temperature, which gave more thrust.

The engine was completely redesigned, except for the compressor and turbine aerodynamic definitions, so that it would be reliable running for prolonged periods at unprecedented temperatures, not only inside the engine but also surrounding the casings where the controls, accessories, electrical wiring and fuel and oil tubes were located.

Starting
Two starting methods were used during the life of the A-12, YF-12 and SR-71 aircraft: an AG330 starter cart with two Buick V8 engines driving a common output shaft, or compressed air driving a small starter adapter. The air-start method superseded the cumbersome "Buicks" when better compressed air supplies became available.

Fuel
Any aircraft flying at three times the speed of sound is in a severe thermal environment, both from frictional heating and stagnation ram rise. The fuel was the only heat sink available to the aircraft and after absorbing 40,000 Btu/min, keeping everything cool enough from the crew to the exhaust nozzle area indicator, it was supplied to the fuel nozzles at 600 F. To cope with these high temperatures, a new jet fuel with a low vapor pressure had to be developed. A chemical method for igniting the fuel, triethyl borane (TEB), was developed to match its low volatility. TEB spontaneously ignites in contact with air above −5 °C. The engine and afterburner were lit with TEB and the afterburner also had a catalytic igniter that glowed in the hot turbine exhaust. Each engine carried a nitrogen-pressurized sealed tank with 600 cm3 of TEB, sufficient for at least 16 starts, restarts, or afterburner lights; this number was one of the limiting factors of SR-71 endurance, as after each air refueling the afterburners had to be reignited. When the pilot moved the throttle from cut-off to idle position, fuel flowed into the engine, and shortly afterwards an approx. 50 cm3 shot of TEB was injected into the combustion chamber, where it spontaneously ignited and lit the fuel with a green flash. In some conditions, however, the TEB flow was obstructed by coking deposits on the injector nozzle, hindering restart attempts. Refilling the TEB tank was a perilous task; the maintenance crew wore silver fire suits. Conversely, the JP-7 fueling was so safe that some aircraft maintenance was permitted during filling. The chemical ignition was chosen instead of a conventional igniter for reliability reasons, and to reduce mechanical complexity. The TEB tank is cooled with fuel flowing around it, and contains a disk that ruptures in case of overpressure, allowing TEB and nitrogen to discharge into the afterburner.

One heat source required two-stage reduction. Before entering the fuel heat-sink system, the Environmental Control System (ECS) air leaving the engine compressor at 1230 F was so hot that ram air at 760 F had to be used first. Fuel flowing from the tanks to the engines was used to cool the air conditioning systems, aircraft hydraulic fluid, engine oil, accessory drive system oil, the TEB tank and afterburner nozzle actuator control lines.

Materials
The development of the J58 involved some of the most challenging metallurgical development problems experienced by Pratt & Whitney Aircraft so far, with components operating at unprecedented temperatures and levels of stress and durability. New manufacturing techniques as well as new alloys improved the mechanical properties, and surface coatings had to be developed to protect components.

Premature cracking of turbine vanes and blades made from conventionally cast (i.e. equiaxed) Mar-M200, the strongest cast nickel-base alloy, was avoided by the development of directionally solidified parts cast in the same material. Directionally solidified Mar-M200 became the strongest cast turbine material to date and was introduced in production engines. Single-crystal turbine blades cast in Mar-M200, giving further improvement of high temperature resistance, would also be developed through testing in J58 engines. Waspaloy was the most widely used alloy in the engine, from critical high-energy rotating compressor discs to components made from sheet. Although used for turbine discs in other engines, it did not have the required properties for J58 turbine discs. Astroloy, the strongest known nickel-base superalloy in the Western world at that time, was used instead. Waspaloy was also used initially for the diffuser case, the part that joins the compressor to the combustor and that contains the highest pressure in the engine. Diffuser case weld cracking led to the introduction of Inconel 718 for this part. The afterburner liner was sprayed with ceramic thermal barrier coating that, together with the cooling air from the compressor, allowed continuous use of the afterburner with flame temperatures up to 3,200 F.

Performance enhancement for NASA
NASA was loaned 2 SR-71 aircraft for research work. One was modified to flight-test a Linear Aerospike rocket engine and was fitted with thrust-enhanced J58 engines. Engine thrust was increased by 5% to offset increased aircraft drag. The increased thrust came from a throttle push, or exhaust gas temperature uptrim, of 75 F-change. The increase was limited by the allowable reduction in life of the second-stage turbine blades (the life-limiting component) from 400 to 50 hours. The same thrust-enhancement studies used for this work also looked at an additional 5% thrust from additional afterburner fuel made possible with oxidizer injection (nitrous oxide). The nitrous oxide rate would have been limited by thermal choking of the nozzle.

Legacy
, the J58 is the only known aircraft engine designed to operate continuously at maximum afterburning at high Mach number cruise. J58 experience was used extensively in the JTF17 engine proposal for a Mach 2.7 SST, due to significant flight time at Mach 2.7 and above. It was also used for subsequent engines developed by Pratt & Whitney, both commercial and military. The next afterburning engine, the TF30 as installed in the F-111, used an airframe-mounted secondary nozzle with free-floating flaps similar to that used on the SR-71.

J58 emissions were measured as part of the NASA Stratospheric Wake Experiment, which looked at the environmental impact of using afterburning jet engines for supersonic transports. An engine was tested in an altitude chamber at a maximum condition of full afterburning at Mach 3.0 and 19.8 km altitude.

Contemporary compressor solutions for Mach 3 flight
Alternative solutions to combat the adverse effects of high inlet temperature on the aerodynamic performance of the compressor were rejected by the Pratt & Whitney patentee, Robert Abernethy. One of those solutions was used in a contemporary installation. The GE YJ93/XB-70 used a variable-stator compressor to avoid front-stage stall and rear-stage choking.

Another possible solution, pre-compressor cooling, was used on the MiG-25's R-15 engines. Water/methanol was injected from a spray mast in front of the compressor to lower the intake temperature for short durations at maximum speed. Pre-compressor cooling was also proposed for a Mach 3 reconnaissance Phantom and the Mach 3+ F-106 RASCAL project.

Propulsion system design

The propulsion system consisted of the intake, engine, nacelle or secondary airflow and ejector nozzle (propelling nozzle). The propulsive thrust distribution between these components changed with flight speed: at Mach 2.2 inlet 13% – engine 73% – ejector 14%; at Mach 3.0+ inlet 54% – engine 17.6% – ejector 28.4%.

Intake
The intake had to supply air to the engine with acceptable pressure loss and distortion. It had to do this in all flight conditions.

Nacelle airflow and ejector nozzle
The ejector, or secondary, nozzle performed the reverse function of the inlet accelerating the turbine exhaust from about Mach 1.0, as it left the primary nozzle, back up to Mach 3. Mach 3 exhaust velocity is higher than Mach 3 flight velocity due to the much-higher temperature in the exhaust. The nacelle airflow from the intake controlled the expansion of the hot engine exhaust in the ejector nozzle. This air flowed around the engine and served also to cool the hot external parts of the engine and to purge any combustible mixtures in the event of a fuel or oil leak in the nacelle.

Variants

 * JT11-1: Proposed version with 26,000 lbs. thrust in afterburner; Mach 3 dash capability.
 * JT11-5A: Proposed version with 32,800 lbs. thrust in afterburner; Mach 3+ capability.
 * JT11-7: Proposed version with 32,800 lbs. thrust with afterburner; Mach 4 capability.
 * JT11D-20: (J58-P-4) Production version for the SR-71.

 * J58-P-2: proposed for a US Navy fighter, canceled mid-1959.
 * J58-P-4:

Applications

 * Lockheed A-12
 * Lockheed M-21
 * Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird
 * Lockheed YF-12

title: Pratt & Whitney J58


text:
Category:Ramjet engines

This is the category for all articles that deal with ramjet technology and use.

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

title: Category:Ramjet engines


text:
Epping and Ongar Rural District

Epping and Ongar Rural District was a rural district in the county of Essex, England from 1955 to 1974.

Creation
It was created in 1955 by the merger of the disbanded Ongar Rural District and most of the disbanded Epping Rural District, except the civil parishes of Great Parndon, Harlow, Latton, Little Parndon and Netteswell, which were largely transferred to the newly created Harlow Urban District reflecting its new town status. The Epping and Ongar administration was based in Epping.

Abolition
At the time of its dissolution it consisted of 29 civil parishes. Since 1 April 1974 it has formed part of the District of Epping Forest, except for the civil parishes of Blackmore, Doddinghurst, Kelvedon Hatch, Navestock and Stondon Massey, which became part of the Borough of Brentwood.

title: Epping and Ongar Rural District


text:
Brazilian merganser

The Brazilian merganser (Mergus octosetaceus) is a South American diving duck in the Mergus genus. It is one of the most threatened waterfowl species in the world, with possibly fewer than 250 birds in the wild and a small number kept in captivity in Brazil. It has a long, sharp-edged beak with a great number of tooth-like edges.

Description
This merganser is a dark, slender duck with a shiny dark-green hood with a long crest, which is usually shorter and more worn-looking in females. Upperparts are dark grey while the breast is light grey, getting paler toward the whitish belly, and a white speculum is particularly noticeable in flight. It has a long thin jagged black bill with red feet and legs. Although females are smaller with a shorter bill and crest, both sexes are alike in color. The slender ducks range in size from 49 to 56 cm as an adult. Young Brazilian mergansers are mainly black with white throat and breast. The Brazilian mergansers are generally silent birds, but may make barking calls in certain situations. Four calls have been recorded. A harsh krack-krack acts as an alarm call emitted in flight. Males make a barking dog-like call, females make a harsh rrr-rrrr and the contact call is a soft rak-rak-rak. Ducklings give a high pitched ik-ik-ik.

Depending on the availability of suitable nesting and feeding sites, Brazilian merganser pairs occupy permanent territories of 8 to 14 km stretches of rivers. Tree cavities, rock crevices, or disused burrows predominantly made by armadillos are the ideal places for these mergansers to build their nests. It is thought the breeding season is during the austral winter, when rain is minimal and water levels are low, but it may vary geographically. The Brazilian merganser usually lays three to six eggs in June and July, with the chicks hatching during the following July and August. The young are capable of flight by September and/or October. Only the female birds incubate the eggs, but both parents care for the young. This is a very unusual behavior in ducks for both parents to help raise the young birds including direct provision of food to young. Adult Brazilian mergansers are believed to remain on the same territory all year round, but there is not very much information about their movements and dispersal, so information on this is presently speculative in nature. Fish is the Brazilian merganser's main food, and they also eat molluscs, insects and their larvae. The birds, usually in pairs, capture fish by diving in river rapids and backwater.

Population
The merganser population is believed to have less than 250 birds. Originally, the duck's geographical distribution comprised central-south Brazil and adjacent regions in Paraguay and Argentina. Currently, all confirmed populations are located in Brazil and a more recent population in Argentina and information on most populations is very scarce. The Brazilian merganser population in the Serra da Canastra region is the most significant and best known, with populations occurring hundreds of kilometers away from each other. There are 47 individuals—28 adults and 19 young—in the Serra de Canastra region as of 2006. Most mergansers are found in the Serra da Canastra National Park. 70 birds have been seen near the park's headquarters in rio São Francisco. In Jalapão region are estimated 13 individuals in Novo river on 2009/2010 (four couples and some solitary adults). In 2002, the species was also found on the Arroyo Uruzu in Misiones, Argentina, the first record in the country for ten years, despite extensive surveys done by local researchers conducted throughout previous years. The bird was last reported seen in 1984 in Paraguay, where very little habitat remains; however some local reports show that a few individuals may still be living in the area.

Habitat
The slender Brazilian mergansers live in low densities in remote and mountainous regions where it inhabits clean rivers and streams with river rapids and riparian vegetation. Brazilian mergansers are very territorial birds defending large stretches of river and the land surrounding the fast-flowing water. They are recognized as a resident species that does not abandon the watercourses where it established its territory. They do not move or want to move once their habitats have disappeared. The birds need large territories and their habitat is fast dwindling.

Threat
The Brazilian mergansers are very sensitive to habitat degradation and loss primarily due to human actions. A major threat to the birds' survival is the issue of silting of rivers caused by the expansion of farming activities, mining, watershed degradation and soil erosion, as well as deforestation. Current traditional soil management and use practices in the region from farming may bring about serious damage regarding conservation of natural resources, especially water, on which the Brazilian mergansers and the farmers themselves are dependent. One of the farming practices here is shifting cultivation. It is common in the region to see farmers burning forest areas causing environmental damage to the natural vegetation and soils and the resident species. A new threat to the species includes the installation of hydroelectric plants. Hydropower plants are planned to be built in the same rivers that Brazilian mergansers have been found in Paraná (rio Tibagi), Goiás (rio Paranã) and Tocantins (rio Novo). The hydropower plants are a major threat to the birds' survival because the plants transform systems such as creeks, rivers and streams into turbid lake systems. The project has government backing in spite of the damage it may cause. Dam-building has also become a major part in the disappearance of these birds. The filling of the Urugua-i reservoir, which took place between 1989 and 1991, had a major impact on Brazilian mergansers in Argentina. The population declined drastically when its fast-flowing rivers were turned into large lakes. After the Urugua-i dam was built, the birds have only been seen on the Uruzu stream, a tributary of the Urugua-i. The dams flood suitable habitat, especially in Brazil and Paraguay, where the Brazilian mergansers build their nests and lay their eggs.

Another threat to the Brazilian merganser is tourism. The scenic beauty of Serra de Canastra National Park brings people from around the world to see the ecotourism landmark. Tourists are attracted to the abundant supply of clear water with over 150 waterfalls in the area. Sporting activities also create a disturbance for the Brazilian mergansers. Activities such as canoeing and rafting disturb the natural habitats for the Brazilian mergansers that thrive on the rapid-rivers, interrupting breeding patterns. Water pollution and deforestation are also a concern as new facilities are built.

Other threats include inbreeding, pesticides and predation. Very few individuals survive from these threats and extinction may be imminent. People hunting the birds for food and collecting them for exhibition specimens contributed to the decline of the species.

title: Brazilian merganser


text:
CHRP

CHRP may refer to:
 * Common Hardware Reference Platform
 * Certified Human Resources Professional
 * Trigeneration

title: CHRP


text:
Jonathan Kozol

Jonathan Kozol (born September 5, 1936) is an American writer, progressive activist, and educator, best known for his books on public education in the United States.

Education and experience
Born to Harry Kozol and Ruth (Massell) Kozol, Jonathan graduated from Noble and Greenough School in 1954, and Harvard University summa cum laude in 1958 with an A.B. in English literature. He was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to Magdalen College, Oxford. He did not, however, complete his scholarship, deciding instead to go to Paris to learn to write fiction and nonfiction from experienced authors such as William Styron, Richard Wright, and others who were living in Paris at the time. It was upon his return that he began to tutor children in Roxbury, MA, and soon became a teacher in the Boston Public Schools. He was fired for teaching a Langston Hughes poem, as described in Death at an Early Age, and then became deeply involved in the civil rights movement. After being fired from Boston Public Schools, he was offered a position to teach at Newton Public Schools, the school district he attended as a child, and taught there for several years before becoming more deeply involved in social justice work and dedicating more time to writing. Kozol is of Jewish heritage.

Kozol has since held two Guggenheim Fellowships, has twice been a fellow of the Rockefeller Foundation, and has also received fellowships from the Field and Ford Foundations.

Kozol also has worked in the field of social psychology. He has been working with children in inner-city schools for more than forty years. Kozol is currently on the editorial board of Greater Good Magazine, published by the Greater Good Science Center at the University of California, Berkeley. Kozol's contributions include the interpretation of scientific research into the roots of compassion, altruism, and peaceful human relationships.

Writing career
Death at an Early Age, his first non-fiction book, is a description of his first year as a teacher in the Boston Public Schools. It was published in 1967 and won the National Book Award in Science, Philosophy and Religion. It has sold more than two million copies in the United States and Europe.

Among the other books by Kozol are Rachel and Her Children: Homeless Families in America, which received the Robert F. Kennedy Book award for 1989 and the Conscience-in-Media Award of the American Society of Journalists and Authors, and Savage Inequalities: Children in America's Schools, which won the New England Book Award and was a finalist for the National Book Critics Circle Award in 1992.

His 1995 book, Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation, described his visits to the South Bronx of New York City, the poorest congressional district in the United States. It received the Anisfield-Wolf Book Award in 1996.

He published Ordinary Resurrections: Children in the Years of Hope in 2000 and The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America was released September 13, 2005. Kozol documents the continuing and often worsening segregation in public schools in the United States, and the increasing influence of neoconservative ideology on the way children, particularly children of color and poor children of urban areas, are educated.

Kozol advocates for integrated public education in the United States and is a critic of the school voucher movement. He continues to condemn the inequalities of education and the apparently worsening segregation of black and Hispanic children from white children in the segregated public schools of almost every major city of the nation. Kozol's ethical argument relies heavily on comparisons between rich and poor school districts. In particular, he analyzes the amount of money spent per child. He finds that in school districts whose taxpayers and property-owners are relatively wealthy, the per-child annual spending is much higher (for example, over $20,000 per year per child in one district) than in school districts where poor people live (for example, $12,000 per year per child in one district). He asks rhetorically whether it is right that the place of one's birth should determine the quality of one's education.

Non-profit
Kozol founded The Education Action Fund, which serves as a nonprofit charitable fund that provides direct assistance to many of the children and families profiled in his books. Donations to the EAF go directly towards children and families living in impoverished or racially isolated areas, and often provide a much-needed relief from financial instability.

Awards and honors

 * 1968 National Book Award for Death at an Early Age.
 * 1970 and 1980 Guggenheim Fellowship
 * 1972 Field Foundation Fellowship
 * 1974 Field Foundation Fellowship
 * 1978 and 1983 Rockefeller Fellowship
 * 1988 Conscience in Media Award from the American Society of Journalists and Authors
 * 1988 Christopher Award
 * 1992 New England Book Award
 * 1996 Anisfield-Wolf Book Award for Amazing Grace
 * 2005 Puffin/Nation Prize for Creative Citizenship.
 * 2013 The Deborah W. Meier Hero in Education Award from FairTest

Works

 * The Fume of Poppies (1958) A novel.
 * Death at an Early Age: The Destruction of the Hearts and Minds of Negro Children in the Boston Public Schools. First published in 1967, it won the National Book Award and sold more than two million copies. It describes his year of teaching in the Boston Public School System. Reissue ISBN 0-452-26292-5
 * Free Schools (1972) ISBN 0-395-13606-7
 * The Night is Dark and I Am Far from Home (1975) ISBN 0-395-20727-4
 * Children of the Revolution: A Yankee Teacher in the Cuban Schools (1978) ISBN 0-440-00982-0
 * Prisoners of Silence: Breaking the Bonds of Adult Illiteracy in the United States (1980) ISBN 0-816-49004-X
 * On Being a Teacher (1981) ISBN 1-85168-065-9
 * Alternative Schools: A Guide for Educators and Parents (1982) ISBN 0-826-40226-7
 * Illiterate America (1986) ISBN 0-452-25807-3
 * Rachel and Her Children: Homeless Families in America (1988) Awarded the Robert F. Kennedy Book Award for 1989 and The Conscience in Media Award of the American Society of Journalists and Authors, and the Christopher Award, 1988. Reprint ISBN 0-449-90339-7
 * Savage Inequalities: Children in America's Schools (1991) A finalist for the 1992 National Book Critics Circle Award and awarded The New England Book Award. Reprint ISBN 0-060-97499-0 Bookfinder collected reviews.
 * Amazing Grace: The Lives of Children and the Conscience of a Nation (1995) Reprint ISBN 0-060-97697-7 Review and appreciation by Mary Leue.
 * Ordinary Resurrections: Children in the Years of Hope (2000) Reprint ISBN 0-060-95645-3. Review by Jana Siciliano at BookReporter.com.
 * The Shame of the Nation: The Restoration of Apartheid Schooling in America (2005) ISBN 1-400-05244-0
 * Letters to a Young Teacher (2007) ISBN 978-0-307-39371-5
 * Fire in the Ashes: Twenty-Five Years Among the Poorest Children in America (2012) ISBN 1-400-05246-7
 * The Theft of Memory: Losing My Father One Day at a Time (2015) ISBN 978-0-804-14099-7

title: Jonathan Kozol


text:
1948 Democratic National Convention

The 1948 Democratic National Convention was held at Philadelphia Convention Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from July 12 to July 15, 1948, and resulted in the nominations of President Harry S. Truman for a full term and Senator Alben W. Barkley of Kentucky for vice president in the 1948 presidential election.

One of the decisive factors in convening both major party conventions in Philadelphia that year was that the eastern Pennsylvania area was part of the newly developing broadcast television market. In 1947, TV stations in New York City, Washington and Philadelphia were connected by a coaxial cable. By the summer of 1948 two of the three new television networks, NBC and CBS, had the ability to telecast along the east coast live gavel-to-gavel coverage of both conventions. In television's early days, live broadcasts were not routinely recorded, but a few minutes of Kinescope film of the conventions has survived.

Organization
The convention was called to order by the permanent chairman, Senator Alben W. Barkley of Kentucky. With delegates demoralized by Republican wins in 1946 that had given them control of Congress, and what appeared to be Truman's slim chance for reelection in his own right, on July 13 Barkley gave the keynote speech, as he had in 1932 and 1936. He roused the delegates with his opening declaration "We have assembled here for a great purpose. We are here to give the American people an accounting of our stewardship in the administration of their affairs for sixteen outstanding, eventful years, for not one of which we make an apology!" Barkley continued by recalling the bad times of the Great Depression of the 1930s to turn the Republicans' most-repeated attack back on them. Republicans proposed "to clean the cobwebs" from the federal government. Said Barkley: "I am not an expert on cobwebs. But if my memory does not betray me, when the Democratic party took over ... sixteen years ago, even the spiders were so weak from starvation they could not weave a cobweb in any department of the government in Washington!" Barkley concluded his hour-long oration with a visionary call for the Democrats to "lead the children of men ... into a free world and a free life," which inspired the delegates to cheer for more than 30 minutes. His rhetorical effort had the effect of energizing delegates, who began to recover their enthusiasm. It also had the effect of propelling Barkley towards the vice presidential nomination.

Dispute over civil rights
On July 14, Northern Democrats led by Minneapolis Mayor Hubert Humphrey and Illinois Senate candidate Paul Douglas pushed for the convention to adopt a strong civil rights platform plank and endorse President Truman's pro-civil rights actions. They were opposed by conservatives opposed to racial integration and by moderates who feared alienating Southern voters (regarded as essential to a Democratic victory), including some of Truman's own aides. They were supported by northeastern urban Democratic leaders, who thought the plank would appeal to the growing black vote in their cities, traditionally Republican.

In a speech to the convention, Humphrey urged the Democratic Party to "get out of the shadow of states' rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights." The convention adopted the civil rights plank in a close vote (651½–582½).

The southern delegates planned on conducting a walkout during the roll call vote on the party's platform starting with the Alabama delegation, but Sam Rayburn, chair of the convention, instead used a voice vote as he believed a walkout would ruin Truman's presidential campaign. Only 35 of the 278 southern delegates, thirteen from Alabama and the entire twenty-two member Mississippi delegation, left the convention on July 15. 23 of Alabama's 30 alternate delegates also left. The remaining southern delegates gave their support to Senator Richard Russell Jr. on the presidential ballot.

The bolted delegates and other Southerners then formed the States' Rights Democratic Party ("Dixiecrats"), which nominated Strom Thurmond for president and Fielding L. Wright for vice president.

The fight over the civil rights plank at the 1948 convention was a launching point for Humphrey as a political figure of national stature. He was elected to the Senate in November, and in 1964, Vice President of the United States.

Presidential candidates
Balloting for president and vice president took place on July 15. While Southerners who opposed the expansion of civil rights contested Truman for the nomination, he was easily nominated on the first ballot.

Balloting
In the absence of Southern delegates who walked out of the convention with Thurmond, Truman was nominated on a revised first ballot:

Presidential Balloting / 4th Day of Convention (July 15, 1948)

Vice presidential nomination
Various Democratic Party leaders had promoted candidates for the vice presidential nomination, including Alben W. Barkley and Wilson W. Wyatt of Kentucky, William Preston Lane Jr. and Millard Tydings of Maryland, Oscar R. Ewing of Iowa, James Roosevelt of California, and Joseph C. O'Mahoney of Wyoming.

In addition, Truman tried to interest William O. Douglas in the nomination, but Douglas declined. During the convention, Barkley's keynote speech won over the delegates, and when it became clear Barkley had more than enough support to win the nomination, Truman agreed to accept him as his running mate.

Barkley was nominated by acclamation.

Truman's acceptance
Truman was scheduled to give his acceptance speech at 10 pm on July 14, but the convention was behind schedule, so he spoke in the early morning hours of July 15. In his opening, Truman told the delegates "Senator Barkley and I will win this election and make these Republicans like it — don't you forget that!" His pugnacious attack on what he termed the "Do-Nothing 80th Congress", further energized the delegates who had not taken part in the Dixiecrat walkout. Truman's speech was looked on in retrospect as the start of the "Give 'em Hell, Harry!" campaign theme that enabled Truman to win the November general election.

title: 1948 Democratic National Convention


text:
National Republican Congressional Committee

The National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is the Republican Hill committee which works to elect Republicans to the United States House of Representatives.

The NRCC was formed in 1866, when the Republican caucuses of the House and Senate formed a "Congressional Committee". It supports the election of Republicans to the House through direct financial contributions to candidates and Republican Party organizations; technical and research assistance to Republican candidates and Party organizations; voter registration, education and turnout programs; and other Party-building activities. It is a registered 527 group.

NRCC leadership
The NRCC is always chaired by a Republican member of the House, who may serve up to two consecutive terms. It is governed by an executive committee of 11 members, which includes the party's Leader in the House ex officio, and other members elected by the Republican Conference following a House election.

The chairman is elected by the House Republican Conference after each congressional election. The eight elected leaders of the Republican Conference of the House of Representatives serve as ex officio members of the NRCC's executive committee.

The day-to-day operations of the NRCC are overseen by the executive director, who manages a staff involved in campaign strategy development, planning and management, research, digital, communications, fundraising, administration, and legal compliance.

In addition to the chairman, several other members of the House of Representatives aid the efforts of the committee by overseeing various areas important to the NRCC.

The NRCC is broken down into several internal divisions: Executive, Treasury, Research, Political, Finance, Communications, and Digital.

Young Guns program
Founded in the 2007–2008 election cycle by Congressmen Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan, the Young Guns program began as an organization of House Republicans dedicated to electing open seat and challenger candidates nationwide.

During the 2008 cycle, through a partnership of Republican volunteers, donors and 59 members of the House of Representatives, five House GOP challengers won against incumbent Democrats. Four of those were Young Guns – Tom Rooney (FL-16), Bill Cassidy (LA-06), Lynn Jenkins (KS-02), and Pete Olson (TX-22).

Under the leadership of Chairman Sessions, the NRCC adopted the Young Guns program as the candidate recruitment and training program for House Republicans. It is designed to assist Republican candidates for the House of Representatives.

This program is open to all Republican candidates – regardless of a primary or convention situation in their districts – with the ultimate goal of ensuring whoever the Republican nominee is, they are able to build the strongest campaign possible. Those enrolled work with NRCC staff to meet rigorous benchmarks designed to improve their campaign structure, fundraising, communications and online strategy.

There are three levels of the Young Guns program – "On the Radar," "Contender," and "Young Gun." In 2010, 92 campaigns were granted "Young Gun" status.

Patriot Program
Following the 2008 United States House of Representatives elections, the NRCC revamped its incumbent protection program, renaming it the Patriot Program. Candidates given the "patriot" designation are provided additional funding and organizational assistance for their reelection campaigns. Candidates in the Patriot Program represent key districts and are perceived as vulnerable due to the likelihood of a close contest in their upcoming elections.

In 2010, nine of the ten candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program won reelection. The candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program in 2010 were Rep. Dan Lungren (CA-03), Rep. Ken Calvert (CA-44), Rep. Brian Bilbray (CA-50), Rep. Judy Biggert (IL-13), Rep. Joseph Cao (LA-02), Rep. Thaddeus McCotter (MI-11), Rep. Erik Paulsen (MN-03), Rep. Leonard Lance (NJ-07), Rep. Christopher Lee (NY-26), and Rep. Dave Reichert (WA-08).

In 2012, seven of the ten candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program won reelection. The candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program in 2012 were Rep. Sean Duffy (WI-07), Rep. Allen West (FL-22), Rep. Lou Barletta (PA-11), Rep. Pat Meehan (PA-07), Rep. Frank Guinta (NH-01), Rep. Joe Heck (NV-03), Rep. Francisco "Quico" Canesco (TX-23), Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick (PA-08), and Rep. Tom Latham (IA-03).

In 2018, only four of the ten candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program won reelection with the other six either losing or retiring. The candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program in 2018 were Rep. David Valadao (CA-21), Rep. Steve Knight (CA-25), Rep. Darrell Issa (CA-49), Rep. Brian Mast (FL-18), Rep. Jason Lewis (MN-02), Rep. John Faso (NY-19), Rep. Claudia Tenney (NY-22), Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-08), Rep. Will Hurd (TX-23), and Rep. Barbara Comstock (VA-10).

In 2020, all ten candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program won reelection. The candidates endorsed by the Patriot Program in 2020 were Rep. Fred Upton (MI-06), Rep. Don Bacon (NE-02), Rep. Lee Zeldin (NY-01), Rep. John Katko (NY-24), Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-01), Rep. Michael McCaul (TX-10), Rep. Pete Olson (TX-22), Rep. Will Hurd (TX-23), Rep. John Carter (TX-31), and Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (WA-03).

Fundraising
In 2000 and 2002, one-third of the committee's $210.8 million raised was in soft money donations. The committee held record-breaking events featuring President George W. Bush.

After the ban of soft money donations, the NRCC's fundraising sources and techniques have been criticized. For the 2004 election cycle, its top three donors included two Indian tribal clients of Jack Abramoff. Others include gambling interests (also related to Abramoff).

On September 21, 2006, Chairman Tom Reynolds met with lobbyists in Washington, D.C. to warn them to contribute only to Republicans and not to challengers from the Democratic Party because their donations would be tracked and they would lose favors among the Republican members of Congress. Similar activities of the K Street Project occurred when Davis was head of the NRCC; the organization was fined by the Federal Election Commission for transferring funds between PACs for the same candidates in violation of contribution limits.

The NRCC has also offered awards such as "Physician of the Year", "Businessman of the Year", "Columnist of the Year" and "Congressional Order of Merit" to very few individuals each year.

In April 2021, it was reported that the NRCC had sent donors prechecked boxes that would automatically sign donors up for repeating donations every month if not unchecked. The NRCC sent this message in tandem: "If you UNCHECK this box, we will have to tell Trump you're a DEFECTOR." The message was removed after The New York Times reported on the tactic.

Automated phone calls
In 2006, just days before the November 7 midterm congressional elections, there were numerous reports of a series of automated phone calls ("robocalls") being authorized by the NRCC, with the apparent intention to confuse and annoy the supporters of Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives. The automated call would typically begin by saying, "Hello, I'm calling with information about ___" and naming the Democratic candidate. If the recipient hung up, the call would be repeated, often several times, thus leading voters to believe incorrectly that the Democratic campaign was harassing them. The NRCC used the tactic in at least 53 competitive House races.

In New Hampshire, the state attorney general's office requested that the NRCC end the robocalls, but many individuals in the state continued to report receiving them. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee sent the NRCC a cease-and-desist letter. The DCCC letter cited the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulation requiring that a prerecorded telephone call must identify the responsible entity at the beginning of the message, and must include the entity's telephone number. Because the NRCC's calls did not name the NRCC at the beginning and did not provide a contact phone number, the DCCC charged the NRCC with "a pattern of willful noncompliance with FCC requirements".

Embezzlement
On March 13, 2008, the NRCC stated that its former treasurer, Christopher J. Ward, had apparently transferred "several hundred thousand dollars" in NRCC funds to "his personal and business bank accounts". An estimated $724,000 in losses were embezzled from the NRCC by Ward between 2001 and 2007. Ward has served as treasurer for 83 Republican committees and has done work for the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

On June 6, 2008, the Department of Justice, in filing a civil forfeiture proceeding against Ward's house, alleged that Ward "made over $500,000 in unauthorized withdrawals" and that he used the money to make his mortgage payments and for home renovation.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) conducted a probe into disclosure reports submitted by the NRCC during Ward's tenure as treasurer. Guy Harrison, the executive director of NRCC, agreed to pay a $10,000 civil fine and signed a conciliation agreement with the FEC on June 10, 2010.

On December 2, 2010, a federal judge sentenced Ward to 37 months in prison for stealing more than $844,000 from the NRCC and other political fundraising committees for which he worked as treasurer.

2008 congressional elections
In 2008 the NRCC concentrated on trying to help incumbent Republicans win re-election. Even so, the committee had to make "triage"-type decisions about allocating its funds. In October 2008, it canceled several hundred thousand dollars worth of television advertising time slated for the re-election campaigns of Michele Bachmann, Marilyn Musgrave, and Tom Feeney, having concluded that they could not win. The decision drew criticism from the conservative Family Research Council, which stated, "It appears that the NRCC is abandoning social conservative candidates and the issues for which they stand…." Bachmann was the only one of those three who was re-elected, winning a plurality of 46% of the vote in a three-way race.

2010 congressional elections
In 2010, Republican candidates won a historic number of seats in the House of Representatives. Rep. Sessions and the NRCC staff received praise for harnessing voter sentiment and contributing to Republican gains.

The NRCC raised and spent tens of millions of dollars on independent expenditure advertising. Republicans won in 52 of the 66 seats where the NRCC made those expenditures.

The NRCC made some of its biggest gains in New York, where two incumbents won reelection and five seats flipped from being held by Democrats to being held by Republicans. In Pennsylvania, the Committee retained seven incumbents and flipped five seats from being held by Democrats to being held by Republicans. The committee made gains across the midwest, where it won control of both North and South Dakota, and made sizeable gains in Illinois, Wisconsin, and Michigan.

The Committee targeted numerous veteran Democrats who held important posts in their party's leadership. The NRCC worked to help GOP candidates defeat Committee Chairmen John Spratt (Budget), Ike Skelton (Armed Services), and James Oberstar (Transportation and Infrastructure). In each of these cases, Republicans prevailed over the Democrats.


text:
Haven Kimmel

Haven Kimmel (born 1965) is an American author, novelist, and poet.

Life and career
Kimmel was born Susan Elizabeth Jarvis ("Betsy") in New Castle, Indiana, and was raised in Mooreland, Indiana, the focus of her bestselling memoir, A Girl Named Zippy: Growing up Small in Mooreland, Indiana (2001).

The book is written from the perspective of Kimmel as a young girl, and in it she sheds light on the townspeople of Mooreland living there in the 1960s and 1970s during the author's childhood. The name of the memoir stems from the nickname her father had for her growing up; however, Kimmel does not publicly share her real given name, which she changed to Haven Skye at age 18 after Kentucky folk singer Haven Hughes. Her second memoir, She Got Up Off the Couch, and Other Heroic Acts from Mooreland, Indiana, is more history of her childhood, but it also tells the story of her mother, Delonda, who decided to return to college in her middle-age years to eventually become a teacher. Kimmel states she never had the desire to become a writer when she grew up, but by the time she was 21, she says she had "given her life over to poetry," which she would go on to write for the next 15 years.

Kimmel earned her undergraduate degree in English and creative writing from Ball State University in Muncie, Indiana and a graduate degree from North Carolina State University, where she studied with novelist Lee Smith. She also attended seminary at the Earlham School of Religion in Richmond, Indiana. She lives in Durham, North Carolina, has been married three times and has three children (Kat, Obadiah and Augusten- named after American writer Augusten Burroughs).

Kimmel was a poet prior to writing the memoir of her early childhood. The Solace of Leaving Early (2002) and Something Rising (Light and Swift) (2004) are the first two novels in Kimmel's "trilogy of place" about fictional Hopwood County, Indiana. The third book, released in September 2007, is titled The Used World. Her other works include a second memoir, She Got Up Off the Couch (2005), a poetic children's book, Orville: A Dog Story (2003), and a retelling of the Book of Revelation in Killing the Buddha: A Heretic's Bible (2004), edited by Peter Manseau and Jeff Sharlet (ISBN 0-7432-3276-3). Her most recent published works include a children's book, Kaline Klattermaster's Tree House (2008), and the novel Iodine (2008), a psychological tale about a young woman with dark secrets.

Works

 * 2001 A Girl Named Zippy: Growing up Small in Mooreland, Indiana, memoir (ISBN 0-385-49982-5)
 * 2002 The Solace of Leaving Early, novel (ISBN 0-385-49983-3)
 * 2003 Orville: A Dog Story, children's book (ISBN 0-618-15955-X)
 * 2004 Something Rising (Light and Swift), novel (ISBN 0-7432-4775-2)
 * 2005 She Got Up Off the Couch, and Other Heroic Acts from Mooreland, Indiana, memoir (ISBN 0-7432-8499-2)
 * 2007 The Used World, novel (ISBN 0-7432-4778-7)
 * 2008 Kaline Klattermaster's Tree House, children's book (ISBN 978-0-689-87402-4)
 * 2008 Iodine, novel (ISBN 978-1-416-57284-8)

Awards and honors
Nominee, Orange Prize (England), 2003, for The Solace of Leaving Early. Received two National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) grants.

title: Haven Kimmel


text:
User talk:Mateo SA

/Archive 1

Supreme court
Sounds good. And it was probably rude of me to revert your change without taking the issue to the talk page first, and so I apologize for that. Take care. --Arcadian 21:34, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Your translation request completed
(and it looks like SteveW reviewed it)
 * Article: sl:Volitve 2004
 * Corresponding English-language article: Slovenia parliamentary elections, 2004
 * Worth doing because:
 * Material to incorporate into English-language article
 * Originally Requested by: Mateo SA | talk 18:37, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)
 * Status: "Translated, but review requested by Eleassar777 10:50, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)".
 * Other notes: The English-language version is just a stub, but is featured on Current events.

Thank You
Just a quick note to say Thanks for taking care of the strange edit in the Articles of Confederation article. Lou I 16:22, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

your editing of my comments
please do not edit my personal comments on talk pages (including this one). your "copyedit" and "corrections" were not welcome. if you can point me to a wiki policy that supports you changing personal comments without leave of the writer, please do so. otherwise, i am asking that you leave my comments entirely alone. your opinions on how i type/write or what i say may be put around them, not in them. thanks. SaltyPig 23:52, 2005 May 12 (UTC)

Consitutional Respects
Nice work. --Cuimalo 02:48, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

stealing
because they stole thier lands or not doesnt mean we should nopt say the US did such, is it because you wish not to show this that you try to put sieze in? steal is not POV it is blunt truth, sieze tries to say in a way  that it was justified, which it wasnt.

Gabrielsimon 18:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WP:RfD
Just out of curiousity, did you notice the line just above where you added that entry, where it said "New entries go at the **BOTTOM** of the page"? Noel (talk) 01:20, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
Nice shortening of the text I added about the U.S. Constitution, thanks. Sometimes it's hard to see how to write it briefly...! -- Dwheeler

Thanks for your support
Thank you for the support in the accusation of vandalism against me by an anonymous editor. I don't agree with that editor's moves on Norfolk Southern and Cincinnati, New Orleans and Texas Pacific Railway, and have stated as such on the articles' talk pages. I find it curious that I would be accused of vandalizing the same content that I'm working so hard to improve. slambo 01:37, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Minor edits
Thanks for informing me; I've changed my preferences accordingly. -- Emsworth 12:11, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Irredentism
I've reverted your changes. Would you look through your edits and express the irredentist claims, from the irredentist points-of-view, as claims, rather than deleting material so wholesale. The more context, rather than less, we can give them, the better they'll illustrate the meanings of irredentism. Don't be cross: it's all for the best. --Wetman 02:39, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject U.S. Supreme Court cases
Sorry - habit. -- BD2412 talk 20:23, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

US Congress
I wasn't a big fan of spending a whole section in the article on the dual-office thing, but it seems to have evolved into a more general statement, which seems better. I haven't been keeping up with the fight, what exactly is going on? --Golbez 16:21, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Recent US Congress Edits
Hi, I noticed your comments on the edit summary of the edit you recently made to Congress of the United States. You said "revised horribly written section into grammatical English; more work needs to be done; deleted misleading statements about exclusionary rules". Although I agree with many of your changes, I would appreciate it if you would refrain from referring to my edits and "horribly written", as this was an ernest effort to improve the article. I understand that it was probably not perfect, but there is no need to be so attacking. In fact, as I was looking over your edits, I noticed a few instances which I would deem "grammatically incorrect", revision is just part of Wikipedia. Thanks, --Gpyoung talk 02:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you and I apologize if I seemed over-sensitive.

Income Tax
Thanks for taking out the copyvio tax-protest advocacy. I have been meaning to get my reference ducks in a row and do something about that article for some time, but I didn't recognize the copyvio. Robert A West 22:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

Exchange
I noticed your exchange with Septentrionalis. He and I share a trait that is both helpful and hurtful on Wikipedia: we have been voracious readers all our lives, and have a sizable fund of knowledge in which we are justly confident, yet for which we often cannot provide a source at a moment's notice. For one thing, once one has read a fact in half a dozen texts, it just becomes part of one's knowledge base, and one assumes that other knowledgeable editors will either agree, or recognize whence the claim came and be prepared to explain where one went wrong. In addition, recalling which book one read twenty, thirty or forty years ago gets hard. Finally, many of our respective sources, while authoritative, are not available on the web.

This sometimes produces mutually-frustrating episodes, such as the one you just went through. I do not criticize you for asking for sources, but I would regard it as a bad thing if you were left with a bad taste in your mouth, or with the impression that Septentrionalis is either doing OR or being cavalier. The three of us have interests in common, and we will surely see one another again and again. Robert A West 23:45, 1 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I repeat here: I did not condescend, and I regret having said anything that could be perceived as doing so. I am, rather, grateful to you for making clear where I was relying unduly on assumptions some readers will not make; I think your protests produced a better and clearer text. I do not claim expertise in the matter; I do not read Mr. West's comments as claiming it for me.

 * But I have read several accounts of Marbury and their extracts from the decision; and they concur that Marbury lies exactly in the intersection between judicial review in the modern sense and the older theory that each branch of government is responsible for the constitutionality of its own acts. Are these theories genuinely distinct or merely different in emphasis? Which is better in either case? These are "political questions", and ones on which I prefer not to comment. Septentrionalis 22:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I certainly did not mean to claim "expertise" for Septentrionalis in this area. I encourage him to exhibit better temper when challenged, and ask you (Mateo) to give him another chance on another day.  Further affiant saith not.  Robert A West 23:13, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Your remarks are very welcome; and that's quite all right. Robert West thinks we met each other on spots already bruised - you by the tax-avoidance OR; and me by Ultramarine, whose favorite responses to citations of a standard printed authority are
 * to denigrate it as non-peer reviewed research
 * to demand exact citations at length, instead of looking the book up.

Do you want another watcher, or reverter, on Income tax? Septentrionalis 13:02, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Line of Succession
Sorry! I was just about to revert myself, myself. In partial defense, my mistake arose from the AP wire report on S. 442, which said Chertoff was at the bottom. I promise to be less stupid in future, but I'm always making that promise. :) Xoloz 18:10, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Supreme Court
Hi, I have noticed (correct me if im wrong) that you are involved in the Supreme Court Cases WikiProject, and editing SCOTUS related articles in general. I have been working placing the template on articles about individual cases. I was wondering whether the WikiProject was still running (there is a strange note on the top of the talk page saying it was taken over by someone) and it would behoove me to make these changes/additions through the project. I you have any advice regarding this, I would love it hear it. Thanks, --Gpyoung talk 00:34, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Yeah, I noticed it wasn't working right, but I also didn't mean to leave the edit like that. I was forced to leave my computer that night and hadn't realized that I had left an empty infobox on the page. --Gpyoung talk 22:33, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Science pearls
Hello,

Since you contributed in the past to the publications’ lists, I thought that you might be interested in this new project. I’ll be glad if you will continue contributing. Thanks,APH 10:53, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Tax protester
Hi. I've restored the line regarding tax protesters claiming that courts selectively hear cases where evidence is not presented, and added as an explanation your edit summary comment that appeals courts decide questions of law. The reason I did so is because tax protesters do claim in various venues that courts deliberately pick "bad" cases in order to create "bad" law, and I think it's important to both acknowledge that claim and explain why it is erroneous. Cheers! -- BD2412 talk 22:22, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Income tax spam
I took a look at some of the IP addresses adding the spam links, and noticed that one of these added a link to another article (which you reverted). If a fixed set of links starts being added to many number of articles by a lot of IP addresses, you might want to consider the Spam blacklist. --cesarb 02:18, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Re: Irwin Schiff
Hi, responding to your request on my talk page, in what sense do you mean "deal with" 69.171.243.115? I'm not an admin, so I can't block him or protect the page. I've watchlisted the page, and I can try to reason with him, but I doubt that would be to any avail. -- BD2412 talk 21:48, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, it is unfortunate that we seem to disagree on this, but Wikipedia has lots of external links to lots of websites that we wouldn't necessarily recommend people going to (see, e.g., North American Man/Boy Love Association, Stormfront (online site), Bondage (BDSM)). It really shouldn't matter whether it would give the site more Google hits. -- BD2412 talk 01:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism Clearup - Note of Thanks
Thanks for clearing up the senseless vandalism on my user page. Your help is very much appreciated. Andrew 23:24, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:CP
Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:22, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Amendment
Unfortunately, it isn't obvious to all who read such a detailed justification of the whacko arguments detailed in the Titles of Nobility amendment] article that they are in fact, whacko. It is misleading not to point out that no constitutional scholars read the amendment in such a way. NPOV requires labelling lunatic views as such, and normal views as mainstream. - Nunh-huh 00:14, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

re: your note
"Please stop disrupting income tax with unsubstantiated edits. Wikipedia is not a soapbox. If you wish to promote your political views, there are plenty of tax protester sites on the internet. — Mateo SA | talk 20:36, 6 November 2005 (UTC)"

Stop vandalizing my substantiated sourced information on income tax. This is not your personal soapbox. I am putting tax honesty onto the proper page. Place your political views and incorrect assumptions on a different site.216.27.181.235 00:51, 7 November 2005 (UTC)BB

You are blocked from editing on Wikipedia
Stop deleting valid content from Wikipedia. You have been warned that it is vandalism. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.

It is you who are deleting valid content from Wikipedia and adding your unsourced and uncited assumptions. I gave you a last warning that you were vandalizing and you chose to ignore it. You are now blocked from editing on Wikipedia. 206.111.181.109 18:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)BB

You have been reported and are on Wikipedias watchlist for vanadalism206.111.181.109 15:28, 8 November 2005 (UTC)BB

Wikipedia has wrote me back concerning your vandalism and has determined that my writing is not their definition of vandalism.

You have repeatedly been warned to stop vandalising articles on Wikipedia. Please stop it. You are welcome to contribute real edits to Wikipedia but all vandalism done by you will be reverted and you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia if you do not stop vandalising this site. You are already on Wikipedia's watchlist and have been warned. BB69 17:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)BB69

 * The user previously vandalized and has been warned multiple times and reported to Wikipedia.

Income tax
Please do not keep undoing other people's edits without discussing them first. This is considered impolite and unproductive. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. Thank you. --Gareth Hughes 17:12, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Income is defined as gain or profit by the Supreme Court. Anything else is a PoV since it isn't even definied in the IRC. Please do not post any more of your PoV in the article, rather put them in a PoV section for Income Tax. Thanks BB69 17:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)BB69

I'll try to explain but it may be hopeless. By the way, I posted BB69 on Administrators' noticeboard/3RR for his 5 reverts, but that is not a long term solution. -- DS1953 talk 18:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

vandalism
Mateo SA, I am the creator of the Irwin Schiff article which you replaced with something antagonistic enough to suit your tastes. You continually remove my factual statement that Irwin Schiff was not allowed to present evidence at his trial by dismissing it as "nonsense". I believe this qualifies as vandalism. Please stop. --Metarob

I don't care what your definition of "create" is; the article did not exist on Wikipedia before I originated it. The material is not from a "tax protester site", it is from Irwin Schiff's site. Irwin Schiff is not protesting, he is litigating the misapplication of the Internal Revenue Code. I admit that the original article was somewhat biased, but why did you remove factual statements such as "His name was put in for the nomination for President of the United States at the 1996 Libertarian Party National Convention held in Washington D.C."? You simply remove anything which doesn't agree with your version of the truth without any discussion. The federal judge did not "rule against some" of Schiff's evidence, he forbade him from discussing the law he was accused of breaking. My citation from the "lunatic fringe" site? So, you're a psychiatrist now? That so-called lunatic fringe was in attendence at the actual trial and observed the proceedings; were you there? How is their account of what occurred less "valid" than yours? Who are you to decide what parts of the internet are not "valid"? It's not a neutral source? Your opinions about the definition of income are not neutral; the government's persecution of Irwin Schiff is not neutral; and there are many political philosophies detailed on Wikipedia which have links to sites that are not neutral. Instead of deleting information without discussion, you should observe the manner in which BD2412 prefaced the link to http://www.givemeliberty.org in his most recent edit.

Re: Irwin Schiff
Once again, could you try working on Irwin Schiff? I'd rather the article didn't exist, but the original contributor tried to use it as political forum for his views or an advertisement for Schiff. I've tried to create a NPOV stub. After helping out that tax protester editor, you didn't do anything. Maybe you could do a few edits, just a few. At least remove some of the tax protester editor's blatant distortions when he adds them again. Is that asking too much? — Mateo SA | talk 19:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I've done a little cleanup of the POV in Irwin Schiff. My general preference where outlandish charges are made is to allow them in the article, but to explain why they are outlandish. In this case, I think the nature of the accusations fairly directly undercuts their own credibility. BD2412  T 22:20, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, since you got me back into this one, care to add anything to the discussion? BD2412  T 03:19, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Tax protester
BB69 is making repeated legally and factually inaccurate additions to the tax protester article (and continues to revert my efforts to remove his POV) - have a look? BD2412 T 18:07, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Deletion vote: NA Temple Youth
Hi, since you were involved with the article, please see Articles for deletion/North American Federation of Temple Youth - Mid-Atlantic Region (2nd nomination). Best wishes, IZAK 12:01, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks (Ohio Constitution)
Thanks for answering my question on the Ohio Constitution talk page. I have added a link to the Arkansas term limits case to the article. Richard75 00:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey
Glad you're back. Sorry I was a bit of a dick before. bd2412 T 05:53, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... come to think of it, why did I think you'd gone anywhere? bd2412  T 05:54, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Federal Reserve System and Masters of the Universe
I see where you took a stab at the verbiage added by user GeorgeC on the Masters of the Universe. I agree, his verbiage makes little sense to me either. I put a comment on his talk page; maybe he can clear it up. The way he wrote it (and your edits seem to confirm my interpretation), he is saying that the film is saying that the "Federal Reserve" (which obviously is not a real, living, breathing person) somehow did all this stuff prior to the time the Federal Reserve even existed, as the Federal Reserve was not even created until the Federal Reserve Act was enacted. It's nonsensical -- but maybe the film says what he says the film says (I don't know, since I haven't seen the film). I just suspect what he really meant was that the film said that certain nefarious real people (bankers, whoever, etc.) did all this stuff. I say the paragraph still needs some work; let's see if he comes up with anything. Yours, Famspear 15:56, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

"the court" v. "the Court
Thanks for your work on the Tenth Amendment to the United States. It looks like you do lots of editing on Supreme Court case articles, so I thought I would give you a helpful pointer. When a writer uses the words “the court” to refer to the court that handed down a decision, and that court was the Supreme Court of the United States, the “c” in “court” is always capitalized. (Bluebook rule 8). Any time you are editing an article and you see “the Court” referring to the United States Supreme Court, it should be left as correct. If you ever see “the Court” referring to, say, the Texas Supreme Court, it should be changed to “the court.” --Skeenbr0 17:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Dear fellow editors: For what it's worth, I don't follow the Bluebook (i.e., A Uniform System of Citation, also known as the Harvard Bluebook) religiously here in Wikipedia, even though, for example, I usually do refer to the U.S. Supreme Court as "the Court" rather than "the court." I also deliberately refer to a U.S. court of appeals as "the Court" -- though perhaps not consistently.

 * On a separate note, I sometimes deliberately ignore the Bluebook for a special reason, as in my elongated citation for the style of the case in the Supreme Court decision in Merchants' Loan (see Tax protester constitutional arguments). There, I want to make clear to non-lawyer readers that the taxpayer was the Estate of Arthur Ryerson, and not Merchants' Loan.

 * Some courts also do not follow the Bluebook precisely, and I would argue that deviations in Wikipedia should be welcomed where helpful to the reader. As a general proposition, however, I do agree that following the Bluebook is good practice. Yours, Famspear 19:30, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Post-script: Most Wikipedia editors -- who are neither lawyers nor law students -- are not aware of the Bluebook and probably cannot reasonably be expected to go find it and buy it just to edit in Wikipedia. Yours, Famspear 19:36, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, for anyone who is offended by my citation to the Bluebook, you can go online for free and check out Chicago Manual of Style rule 8.69 (“… the Court (traditionally capitalized in reference to the U.S. Supreme Court”).--Skeenbr0 18:53, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Federal Reserve Act
Ahh, good call here. And see my follow up comments on the talk page. Yours, Famspear 22:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way, did you notice that we were getting a lot of personal attacks in the tax protester related material a few weeks ago? I was beginning to wonder if it was full moon, or sun spots or something. Famspear 22:39, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

conspiratorial template
Congressman Paul said: "Well, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, we don't have that in place. It will be a little bit better now with the Democrats now in charge of oversight. But you know, for top level policy there's not a whole lot of difference between the two policies so a real investigation isn't going to happen. But I think we have to keep pushing for it. And like you and others, we see the investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on."; so you see, he does acknowledge cover-up (conspiracy if you wish)… feel free to join the discussion. Regards. Lovelight 02:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Federal Reserve Page
You wanted sources, I gave sources, and you still removed the criticisms of the Federal Reserve that I put in. What more do you want? Why are you not allowing any valid criticisms of the Fed to appear on the article?

Ancient history
Dear colleague: I was trying to relax and recover from tax season today, and was thinking about when I started in Wikipedia. I remember that in November of 2005 when I started, you were dealing with a user called "BB69" who was adding tax protester nonsense to tax articles. Taxman, BD2412 and others got involved in dealing with that problem, and I don't know if you have ever seen what happened to BB69. Here it is:. The last edits in Wikipedia by that user were in December of 2005; he (and I assume he was a "he") finally gave up. Just thought you should see how that turned out. Yours, Famspear 18:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Federal Reserve System as opposed to the Federal Reserve Association of Delaware
Dear Mateo SA: Regarding this material, which you correctly deleted:

 * The Federal Reserve, a private non profit corporation incorporated in Delaware September 3, 1914 as the Federal Reserve Association. Delaware Division of Corporations

--I seem to recall that something like this had been added to the article before (and deleted of course) a long time ago. According to the State of Delaware web site, there actually is a non-profit or religious organization known as the "Federal Reserve Association" incorporated on that date -- but of course there's no indication that this organization has anything to do with the "Federal Reserve System." Might be just another clumsy attempt to say "Federal Reserve System equals private organization, private equals something bad, therefore Federal Reserve System equals something bad." I put this in the same category as the "Internal Revenue Service is a Puerto Rican trust" tax protester garbage. Even if the Federal Reserve System were somehow related to the Federal Reserve Association, that wouldn't change the fact that the System is composed of both governmental and non-governmental components. Regards, Famspear 20:19, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Nice catch...
...on the Bernanke quote I inserted in Federal Reserve System being repetitive. I gave it a cursory look, and when it didn't appear in the section that seeme dlikely, I thought it was missing. Cheers, DickClarkMises 17:36, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Tax protester arguments
Thanks for your diligence in continuing to keep an eye on this and related articles. I watch all the "tax protester" related articles like a hawk, and you very often correct the craziness that seeps in before I can get to it. Hope your summer is going well. Yours, Famspear 21:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Dear Mateo SA: Speaking of craziness and tax protesters, have you read this one?: Edward Lewis Brown. Especially, check out the various quotations from him and his wife in the article. Yours, Famspear 02:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Dear Mateo SA: Here's another one: Tom Cryer. Sadly, this guy is a lawyer who knows (or should know) better. Famspear 16:56, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Response to Unwarranted Removal of Fact
My comment on the 14th Amendment negating the progressive nature was sourced, and I'll thank you to refrain from removing it or dismissing it as rhetoric. Unequal taxation based on wealth does in fact violate the equal protection clause, and while the income tax itself is not unconstitutional (albeit unethical), its implementation remains in contrast with the demands of the Constitution. Sec. 1 Amendment XIV US Constitution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mesthead115 (talk • contribs) 06:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
I've semi-protected it because I'm tired of the daily reverting. If the IP returns to this editing pattern after the semi-protection expires I'll explore moving from a minnow to a trout and implement a solution that will allow the article to be edited by all except our anonymous friend.--Isotope23 talk 14:03, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

About Bob
Just so you'll know, this guy Bob Hurt with whom you interacted earlier today on the talk page for Income tax actually has two Wikipedia talk pages, here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:BobHurt

and here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Bobhurt

His talk pages are, shall we say, "enlightening" as to how he views the world.

As you can see from his talk pages, he and I have been going back and forth since about the spring of 2006. He will disappear for months at a time, and then reappear to re-assert the same kinds of tax protester rhetoric over and over, then disappear again and reappear later. He fluctuates between personal attacks (against me, against the "corrupt" Federal judges, and against IRS employees and Department of Justice people) and, strangely, requests for my personal views about his tax protester arguments -- and just the other day a request that I help someone he apparently somehow knows who is charged with Federal tax crimes (I'm too busy to take on his acquaintance as a client). I believe he has had at least one recent "physical" run-in with law enforcement personnel at a Federal building somewhere. If you google his name on the internet, you may find his web site or weblog -- and some of his discussion of the, uh, unorthodox beliefs he has about various things, not just taxation. Yours, Famspear 18:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Devvy Kidd
Well, I made a few additions to the above-reference article, but the one on We the People Foundation is the more interesting one! I've added quite a bit of information to that latter one, adapted from what we already had in another tax protest-related article.

Bob Schulz and his "We the People Foundation" are pretty notorious. I also contribute at the Quatloos web site forum for tax protester activity, at, and Schulz is well known over there.

I've been at Quatloos only since this past May; it's a pretty interesting place. It's run by people who expose tax protester garbage and other kinds of scams, with tax protesters being a very small and unhappy minority there. Dan Evans, an attorney who runs some of the world's leading web sites exposing the tax protester nonsense, is one of the administrators at Quatloos. There are lots of very good people there (and not just lawyers and CPAs, either). The rules on civility are much more relaxed over there, so tax protesters really catch a lot of heck.

Anyway, the web sites for "We the People Foundation" were substantially shut down, apparently just earlier today as it happens. The court order came earlier this month. There's still some basic information on the web sites, but most if not all of the tax protester garbage had to be removed because of the court order. Justice prevails, sometimes!

Thanks for the tip! Yours, Famspear 03:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that
Duh, thanks. I keep missing that silly non-existent category that keeps getting added to Tax protester arguments! I need some more caffeine this morning. Famspear 16:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Wow, on Excise tax in the United States, thanks for catching the recently added tax protester-related stuff. I think I had just recently added this article to my watch list without fully reading it. I had just made a minor edit in the article, and wasn't aware of the apparently tendentious material in it. Yours, Famspear 18:22, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Wait a minute, I have edits to this article back in March. Maybe it was on my watch list all along. Heck, I don't know how I missed the tax protester stuff (except inattentiveness). Gotta take my vitamins. Famspear 18:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-10-03 Tom Cryer
I have decided to take the mediation case. I would like you to take part in the discussion-- Phoenix 15 19:44, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

RFA on Tom Cryer article
An RFA for the Tom Cryer article has been filed in which you are a party. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpublius (talk • contribs) 16:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Insulting other editors on Elihu Root discussion page
You have been insulting another user on the Elihu Root article, which violates Wikipedia behavioral standards. Please watch your behavior more carefully in the future.Mpublius 15:57, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll put my two cents in here. Dear Mpublius: I believe you are referring to the comments by editor Mateo SA here:. My position would be that Mateo SA's comments do not represent an "insult" to you, or to anyone else. And Mateo SA is correct; other editors can easily see what you are doing. I am not the only editor who has complained about your own behavior. Famspear 16:19, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm a Wikiquette volunteer who is responding to the alert User:Mpublius placed on that page. The only Wikiquette violation I can see in User:Mateo SA's behaviour is a bit of a failure to assume good faith with the "Do you really think no one will notice what you are doing?"  Obviously I'm not familiar with the full history of your interaction, so it's possible that User:Mpublius has done something that has caused you to stop assuming good faith on his part; unless you have a very good reason for not doing so, however, I'd encourage you to assume that any future copyright violations you see are errors, and not malicious. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 02:29, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Tax protester/Request for comment
Your input in this RfC would be most welcome. Cheers! bd2412 T 18:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Tax protester constitutional arguments FAC
I have nominated Tax protester constitutional arguments as a feature article candidate. If you're interested in responding to comments and addressing any issues that arise, please add the above FAC page to your watchlist. Also consider voting on the article. Thanks Morphh   (talk) 17:52, 03 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Mateo SA, where are you? Haven't seen you around in quite a while! Come back! Famspear (talk) 02:11, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

U.S. Bill of Rights
I noticed the article on the Bill of Rights, to which you have contributed extensively, has an unreferencedsection template in it; possibly, the paragraph immediately following this template may need additional inline citations.

It may turn out that such citations are not necessary; on the other hand, detailed citations assist in guarding against copyright violations, so I think that discussion should be part of a formal featured article review, for which I have nominated the article. Please post your views on this matter to Featured article review/United States Bill of Rights.

69.140.152.55 (talk) 01:31, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Long term abuse
Long term abuse, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long term abuse and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Long term abuse during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.

Welcome back
Welcome back! I still watch the tax protester-related articles. Glad you're editing again! Famspear (talk) 01:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

 * The lunatics have been pretty quiet over the past several months, but you never know..... Famspear (talk) 12:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Tell us how you really feel about tax protester edits. Seriously, that's a little over the top, isn't it?  — Arthur Rubin  (talk)

 * I believe that the lunatics some editors may be seeking are no farther away than their own mirror.Paraplegicemu (talk) 06:10, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Tenth Amendment
Thanks for the cleanup. I was in the middle of reformatting the section and adding more stuff, so please head out there and see if more cleanup is needed. Quidam65 (talk) 16:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Puerto Rico federal income taxes
I have provided citations for the variosu figures. Also removed the so I wouldn't forget later. However, if I missed anything, let me know (put s right next to them) and I will try and pull them out as my time permits. Regards Mercy11 (talk) 04:30, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Anne Lindbergh for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Anne Lindbergh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Anne Lindbergh until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GiantSnowman 20:47, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Which law requires Americans to pay direct income tax on their labor listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Which law requires Americans to pay direct income tax on their labor. Since you had some involvement with the Which law requires Americans to pay direct income tax on their labor redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GZWDer (talk) 19:08, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Why the federal income tax is illegal listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Why the federal income tax is illegal. Since you had some involvement with the Why the federal income tax is illegal redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GZWDer (talk) 19:13, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

America—Freedom to Fascism listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect America—Freedom to Fascism. Since you had some involvement with the America—Freedom to Fascism redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 18:26, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

You cannot file a tax return without giving up your Fifth Amendment rights listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect You cannot file a tax return without giving up your Fifth Amendment rights. Since you had some involvement with the You cannot file a tax return without giving up your Fifth Amendment rights redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:59, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Txptconarg listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Txptconarg. Since you had some involvement with the Txptconarg redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:01, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse
Wikipedia:Long-term abuse, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Long-term abuse& and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:Long-term abuse during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Every morning  (there's a halo...)  01:08, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

12th Amendment USC listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 12th Amendment USC. Since you had some involvement with the 12th Amendment USC redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 04:00, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

"50 State Quarters® Program" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 50 State Quarters® Program and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. BD2412 T 04:32, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mateo SA


text:
Death at an Early Age

Death at an Early Age: The Destruction of the Hearts and Minds of Negro Children in the Boston Public Schools (reissue ISBN 0-452-26292-5) is a book written by the American schoolteacher Jonathan Kozol and published in Boston by Houghton Mifflin in 1967. It won the U.S. National Book Award in the Science, Philosophy and Religion category.

The book describes Kozol's first year of teaching a fourth grade in one of the most overcrowded inner city schools in the Boston public school system. Kozol recounts the deeply entrenched policies of racial segregation and inequality on the part of Boston Public Schools and testifies to a crumbling infrastructure in his Roxbury, Boston, neighborhood. The "classroom" he was assigned turned out not to even be a room at all but a corner of an auditorium where other classes were also held, and one day a large window collapsed as he was teaching his class.

The book also documents the public outcry after his dismissal for teaching the Langston Hughes poem "The Ballad of the Landlord" to his reading class, which portrays the exploitation of black tenants by white landlords. The day after presenting the poem to the class an official from the school district informed him that "no literature which is not in the Course of Study can ever be read by a Boston teacher without permission from someone higher up" and he was fired from his position.

title: Death at an Early Age


text:
Grupo Montparnasse

The Grupo Montparnasse was an organization of Chilean artists who had joined the gathering of great artists in the Montparnasse Quarter of Paris, France, in the early part of the 20th century. Founding members, Luis Vargas Rosas and Camilo Mori among others, exhibit in the Salon d'Automne of 1920 in Paris where they meet Juan Gris, Pablo Picasso and other artists experimenting in the new trends of the time like cubism and expressionism. The group's first exhibition was organized by Luis Vargas Rosas in Santiago in 1923. Their first exhibition was marked by postimpressionist influences, notably the works of Paul Cézanne. Their "Salón de Junio" in 1925 saw a new generation of young painters join the group. Just as their comrades in Paris had, these creative men and women challenged the norms in Chilean painting, profoundly shaping a new world of art in their country.

Some of the group's members and adherents

 * Graciela Aranis (1908-1996)
 * Pablo Burchard (1873–1960)
 * Jorge Caballero (1902–1992)
 * Isaías Cabezón (1891–1963)
 * Hector Cáceres (1897–1980)
 * Ana Cortés (1906–1998)
 * Augusto Eguiluz (1893–1969)
 * Jorge Letelier (1887–1966)
 * Camilo Mori (1896–1973)
 * Julio Ortiz de Zárate Pinto (1885–1943)
 * Manuel Ortiz de Zárate Pinto (1887–1946)
 * Henriette Petit (1894–1983)
 * José Perotti (1898–1956)
 * Inés Puyó (1906–1996)
 * Luis Vargas Rosas (1897–1977)
 * Pablo Vidor (1892–1991)
 * Waldo Vila (1894–1979)
 * Marta Villanueva (1900–1995)
 * Álvaro Yáñez Bianchi "Juan Emar" (1893–1964)

title: Grupo Montparnasse