text:
Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics

The Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences (ABARES) is a federal research branch of the Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, located in Canberra, Australia. ABARES was established on 21 August 1945 as the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BAE), and is also involved in commercial consultancy. It was merged with the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) in 2010. The main role of ABARES is to provide "professionally independent data, research, analysis and advice that informs public and private decisions affecting Australian agriculture, fisheries and forestry”. ABARES maintains the AgSurf database which includes farm survey data on farm performance, production benchmarks, farm management, socioeconomic indicators relating to the grains, beef, sheep and dairy industries in Australia. ABARES has received funding from business and industry groups. ABARES' website notes that "Over half of ABARES' external revenue is derived from commercial consulting work."

History
ABARES was founded on the 21st of August 1945 as the Bureau of Agricultural Economics (BAE) with the preliminary purpose of researching the economic potential of primary industries and their efficiency. Initially, the bureau was established to operate within the Ministry of Post-War Reconstruction and was then transferred into the Ministry for Commerce and Agriculture in August 1946. In 1988, the bureau combined with the Bureau of Mineral Resources to become the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics (ABARE) which would further widen the field of research to include energy, minerals markets and issues such as climate change. In 2010, ABARE undertook a further merger with the Bureau of Rural Sciences (BRS) with the goal to grant ABARES the capacity to undertake integrated economic, scientific and social science research. In 1952, the bureau began to undertake frequent review and forecasts of farm survey data. Formal and regular assessments including a wider variety of productivity indicators of Australian agriculture began in the 1980s.

People
ABARES is under the direct leadership of several federal Ministers which include: In 1948, ABARES had 25 professional staff with university degrees in economics or agricultural economics, and this number grew to 55 in 1954 than to 85 in 1962. During the 1970s ABARES’ employee count had risen to 200 with special qualifications in economics. In the 1980s when the then ABARE merged with the Bureau of Mineral Resources to become ABARES, the total employee count peaked at just above 300, from the 1980s the employee count of ABARES declined to roughly 125 employees as of 2017–18.

Data Collection, Processes and Procedures
ABARES collects a broad range of commodity, climate and agricultural data. The data ABARES collects is the chief source of publicly available data for Australian agricultural and resource economics related commodities and industries, and has been described as more accurate in these fields than other organisations. ABARES’ surveys are sometimes collected via face-to-face interviews. Compared with other national agricultural and resource economics data collection agencies, ABARES is considered one of the more reliable and thorough. While ABARES does collate and produce reports exclusively within ABARES, often, ABARES will co-produce reports and documents with industry groups. By working collaboratively, the advice ABARES and the private entity provide will be received more effectively than information provided solely by ABARES or a private entity.

ABARES collates three annual agricultural surveys which includes: - The Australian Agricultural and Grazing Industry Survey (AAGIS)

- Australian Dairy Industry Survey (ADI)

- Murray-Darling Basin Irrigation Survey

The Australian Agricultural and Grazing Industry Survey (AAGIS) is a large report compiled by ABARES which assesses broadacre industries on a yearly basis. ABARES determines the target number and types of farms to include in the AAGIS survey. To do this, ABARES collects data on farms that participated in the survey in the previous year (and would like to participate in the current year) and then resample the remaining population to reach the target number and composition. Furthermore, the data collected within the AAGIS survey is split into various zones as to aid consistent data interpretation.

The ADI survey covers farms that are engaged in dairying. Australia's Dairy industry is the third largest rural industry behind wheat and beef and has a gross value of $4 billion.

The Murray-Darling Basin Irrigation Survey covers a broad range of industries and subindustries. The gross revenue from agriculture in the basin was $13.6 billion in 2000–01, of which $4.6 billion was estimated to be derived from irrigation. Irrigated agriculture is practiced on about 15 000 different farming properties throughout the Basin. The three main industries in this survey include Broadacre, Dairy and Horticulture. These are then subdivided into smaller industries to survey data on sheep farming, beef farming, grain growing, rice growing, cotton growing, dairy cattle farming, vegetable growing under cover and outdoors, grape, apple and pear, stone fruit, citrus fruit and other fruit and tree nut growing.

ABARES additionally collaborates with many other Australian government agencies to collect data on specific industries that may overlap with the other agency.

Publications
The data collected by ABARES is often used for governmental and private sector consulting. Additionally, the data collected by ABARES has been used by independent researchers on several occasions to assist in accurate and reliable reporting. ABARES also produces many forecasts throughout the year, “ABARES regularly prepares forecasts of area, production, and yields for more than twenty winter and summer crops in each Australian State”. Among the regular forecasts and reports is a weekly national update, the update covers a range of topic including climate data, key issues, commodity information and water usage.

Forecasting and modelling was widely used in commodity outlook studies, it wasn't until the 1970s these models were applied to agricultural markets. The expanding of these forecasts and models globally allowed ABARES to dedicate more of their resources to publishing these types of models. The 1980s introduction of the Econometric Model of Australian Broadacre Agriculture (EMABA) was one of the first major forecasting models produced by ABARES. Agricultural forecasts are still regularly published with the aim to provide information on expected prices to help ensure that markets operate fairly, and, identify and form policy responses to emerging issues. Additionally, ABARES publishes data on land usage and land occupation which assists in forecasts and modelling.

Through hosting the Annual National Outlook Conference, ABARES has been able to collate annual forecasts of major commodities and quarterly gross values of agricultural production, resources and exports.

During the 2018 Banking Royal Commission, ABARES provided a broad range of data from farm surveys and other public resources to assist the investigation of farm indebtedness. The main publication that was used for the background report was the Regional farm debt: northern Queensland gulf, south west Queensland and north west New South Wales report which was published in December 2014.

Additionally, ABARES publish a number of series, including the Australian quarterly forecast report, Agricultural commodities (ISSN 1839-5619, since September 2011).

History of Agricultural commodities report
The Agricultural commodities title replaced Australian commodities: forecasts and issues (ISSN 1321-7844, March 1994-June 2011), formerly Agriculture and Resources Quarterly (ISSN 1032-9722, March 1989-December 1993).

Agriculture and Resources Quarterly originated from the merging of Resource Trends (ISSN 0818-3619, September 1986-December 1988) and Quarterly review of the rural economy (ISSN 0156-7446, February 1979-December 1988, previously Quarterly review of agricultural economics ISSN 0033-5754, January 1948-April/July 1978).

Controversy
In February 1998 the Commonwealth Ombudsman produced a report of an investigation into ABARE's external funding of climate change economic modelling. The investigation was instigated after the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) sought membership of ABARES’ established GIGABARE Steering Committee. ABARES sought a membership fee from ACF which the ACF requested to be waived. After the waiver was declined the ACF then made a formal complaint to the Ombudsman on the basis of:

-        ABARES’ undisclosed source for research funding,

-        ABARES’ lack of appropriate guidelines and protocols for private sector funding, where private funded projects informed government decisions, and

-        The Steering Committees established by ABARES’ were not accessible to organisations without significant financial resources and thus ABARES’ role providing assistance and advice would be swayed in favour of business interests.

As a result of the investigation the Ombudsman ruled against ABARES and concluded the GIGABARE committee was constituted by ABARE primarily as a means of raising additional revenue for these projects. As a result of the findings ABARES underwent radical restructuring which aimed to limit the possibility of corrupt or fraudulent behaviour into the future.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Television Without Pity

Delete Not-Notable and commerical vanity. We aren't a directing service for websites. ExplorerCDT 02:30, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Keep Using your logic, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AudioBooksForFree.com, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fark.com, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Government:_NationStates, and another of these types of articles should be deleted. This is meant as an archive of human knowledge, and I see no reason to get rid of it. --cuiusquemodi 03:19, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Like "Television Without Pity" is an archive of human knowledge, and ruthless, snarky, quasi-anonymous criticism of television shows advances the cause of the humanity. Thanks for the other vfd suggestions! --ExplorerCDT 21:23, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I don't claim TWoP as a repositoty of truth, but then again, neither is Fark. --cuiusquemodi 03:32, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

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


text:
Santa Rosa First Peoples Community

The Santa Rosa First Peoples Community is the major organisation of Indigenous people in Trinidad and Tobago. The Kalinago of Arima are descended from the original Amerindian inhabitants of Trinidad; Amerindians from the former encomiendas of Tacarigua and Arauca (Arouca) were resettled to Arima between 1784 and 1786. The SRCC was incorporated in 1973 to preserve the culture of the Caribs of Arima and maintain their role in the annual Santa Rosa Festival (dedicated to Santa Rosa de Lima, the first Catholic saint canonised in the New World).

The SRCC is headed by its President Ricardo Bharath Hernandez and maintains a leadership role among Indigenous organisations in Trinidad. The community is also the base for the Carib Queen.

The Amerindians were relocated to open their lands for settlement by the influx of French settlers brought in by the Cedula of Population and to separate the Indigenous people from the newcomers (see: History of Trinidad and Tobago). The Mission was granted 1000 acres (4 km²) of land by Governor José María Chacón, and Governor Ralph Woodford added 320 acres (1.3 km²). However, as the Mission gradually dissolved, these lands were seized by the state.

title: Santa Rosa First Peoples Community


text: User talk:68.124.96.223

title: User talk:68.124.96.223


text:
File:AlDurrah1.jpg

Description: Jamal and Muhammad al-Durrah incident taking cover, Gaza Strip, September 30, 2000

Source: Images that shook the world, BBC News, October 2, 2000.

Copyright: France 2

Rationale for Muhammad al-Durrah incident
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws, and the stricter requirements of Wikipedia's non-free content policies, because:
 * 1) It is an historically significant and iconic image.
 * 2) It is of lower resolution than the original. Copies made from it will be of inferior quality.
 * 3) The image has no monetary value that our use of it would affect.
 * 4) It has been widely distributed free of charge by the copyright holder.
 * 5) It is being used for informational purposes in an article about the event it depicts.
 * 6) The imagery and its historical significance are a key part of the story and the article would be significantly poorer without it.
 * 7) This particular image was chosen for the infobox because it became the most iconic of all the frames from the France 2 footage, the fear apparent on the boy's face and the father gripping his arm.

title: File:AlDurrah1.jpg


text:
Nguyễn Văn Hiếu

Major General Nguyễn Văn Hiếu (23 June 1929, Tianjin, China – 8 April 1975, Biên Hòa, Vietnam) was a general in the South Vietnamese Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN). As a child he lived in Shanghai. He later emigrated with his ethnic Vietnamese parents to Saigon when the Chinese Communist Party took over China in 1949. He attended Aurore University in Shanghai, China. In 1950, he attended the Vietnamese Military Academy, graduating second in his class in 1951. In 1963, he graduated from Command and General Staff College, at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

His assignments included G3/Joint General Staff, G3/I Corps, Chief of Staff of 1st Division, Chief of Staff of I Corps, Chief of Staff of II Corps, Commander of 22nd Division, Chief of Staff of II Corps, Commander of 5th Division, Deputy Commander of I Corps, Minister of Anti-Corruption under Vice-President Trần Văn Hương, Deputy Commander of III Corps, Commander of Forward HQ III Corps and MG Deputy Commander of III Corps. He was found dead on 8 April 1975 at III Corps Headquarters, Biên Hòa, and theories that he had been assassinated emerged. Two days later, he was posthumously promoted to lieutenant general.

Quyết Thắng 202 (Đỗ Xá), 1964
Hiếu, II Corps Chief of Staff, designed and executed Operation Quyết Thắng (Sure Win) 202 aiming directly at the Viet Cong (VC) stronghold at Đỗ Xá (15.177°N, 108.078°W), deep in the Annamite Mountains, at the junction of Kon Tum, Quảng Ngãi and Quảng Tin provinces, from 27 April to 27 May 1964. Units of 50th Regiment, 25th Division participated under the command of Major Phan Trong Trinh, four Ranger battalions under the command of Major Son Thuong and one Airborne battalion under the command of Captain Ngô Quang Trưởng.

Troops were ferried to two landing zones by three helicopters squadrons: USMC HMM-364 Squadron, 117th and 119th squadron of US Army 52nd Aviation Battalion. The VC attacked the helicopters at the landing zones during the two first days, and then vanished into the mountains, avoiding contacts with the invading troops. Operation Đỗ Xá achieved the following results: a communication network of the VC command composed of five stations was destroyed, one of which was used to communicate with North Vietnam, and the other four to link with provincial VC units; the VC lost 62 killed, 17 captured, two 0.51 caliber machine guns, one 0.30 caliber machine gun, 69 individual weapons, and a large quantity of mines and grenades, engineer equipment, explosives, medicine, and documents; in addition, 185 structures, 17 tons of food and 292 acre of crops were destroyed.

Thần Phong II
In 1965, the VC attacked all over the Central Highlands in the II Military Region. In early July 1965, three People's Army of Vietnam (PAVN) regiments (including 32nd and possibly the 33rd) completely isolated the Central Highlands. ARVN units could not use National Routes 1, 11, 14, 19 and 21, and all resupplies to the Highlands had to be performed by air. On 8 July 1965 Hiếu, II Corps Chief of Staff, was entrusted with the design and execution of a plan to reopen National Route 19.

Contrary to the general practice of a road-clearing operation by concentrating troops to progressively destroy the ambushes set up by the enemy along the highway, from D-6 to D+2, Hiếu ordered the 22nd Division and the 3rd Armored Squadron to attack from Qui Nhơn to Tuy Hòa along National Route 1; the 2nd Airborne Task Force together with Regional Forces and Civilian Irregulars Defense Group Forces to retake Lê Thành District; VNMC Alpha Task Force and the 42nd Regiment to attack from Pleiku up north to Đak Sut on National Route 14; and the 20th Engineer Group to attack from Phú Bổn to Tuy Hòa to repair Interprovincial Route 7.

After sowing confusion among the enemy, Hiếu "press[ed] the Viet Cong from three directions with movements launched from Pleiku and Qui Nhơn and a vertical envelopment from north of An Khê. These maneuvers were executed by a task force of the Pleiku sector departing from Pleiku, two task forces of the 22nd Infantry Division departing from Qui Nhơn, and a task force of two airborne battalions heliborne into northern An Khê and attacking south with Task Force Alpha of the marines brigade conducting the linkup." These actions resulted in the free flow of cargo convoys during 5 days from D+3 to D+7, "allowing an initial buildup of 5,365 tons of supplies in Pleiku". Later, operational units withdrew to their camps during D+8 and D+9. As a result of Operation Thần Phong, "the convoys transfused new life into the Highlands. Along with an immediate drop of 25 to 30 percent in the price of food and commodities, the population regained their feelings of security, confidence, and hope. Schoolboys in Pleiku voluntarily helped the troops in unloading the cargoes, and people who had started to evacuate now returned to their homesteads."

Pleime, 1965
After the unsuccessful attempt to overcome the Đức Cơ Special Forces camp in August 1965, General Võ Nguyên Giáp launched the Winter Spring Campaign aiming at cutting South Vietnam in two, from Pleiku in the Central Highlands to Qui Nhơn in the coastal regions. The plan of General Chu Huy Man, VC Field Commander was as follows:
 * 1) PAVN 33rd Regiment feigns to attack Plei Me Camp to entice II Corps to dispatch relief column from Pleiku;
 * 2) PAVN 32nd Regiment sets an ambush to destroy the relief column (an easy target without artillery support nearby);
 * 3) after destroying the relief column, 32nd Regiment joins up with 33rd Regiment in overcoming Plei Me Camp;
 * 4) in the meantime, with the defense of Pleiku weakened by the troops sent out to rescue Plei Me, PAVN 66th Regiment initiates a preliminary attack against II Corps HQ, awaiting 32nd and 33rd Regiments to overcome Plei Me and to join forces to attack and occupy Pleiku.

Hiếu consulted with the US 1st Cavalry Division and came up with the following plan:
 * 1) II Corps feigns biting the bait by reinforcing Plei Me with a unit of ARVN Airborne Rangers and dispatches a task force from Pleiku to relieve Plei Me;
 * 2) 1st Cavalry Division lends a brigade to reinforce the defense of Pleiku and heli-lifts artillery batteries to several locations near the ambush site to support the relief column when under attacked.

This plan neutralized the PAVN 66th Regiment, which remained inactive in the Chư Prông area, destroyed the PAVN 33rd Regiment at the ambush site and the PAVN 32nd Regiment abandoned the siege of Plei Me and withdrew into the surrounding jungle.

Liên Kết 66
42nd Regiment, 22nd Division, reinforced by 3rd Airborne Task Force established a blocking position on the mountain side, joined force with an armored squadron of M113s in sweeping the enemy from National Route 1 into the mountains at Phù Cũ Pass in Bình Định Province. Infantrymen following the M113s launched fierce assaults, after an initial salvo of artillery. Airborne Task Force Commander, Lieutenant Colonel Nguyễn Khoa Nam observing the battle from the mountainside with binocular stated: "Colonel Hiếu conducts his troops like a seasoned 'armor officer', and combatants of 22nd Division fought as elegantly as our paratroopers."

Đại Bàng 800
In February 1967, Hiếu launched Operation Đại Bàng 800. For three days prior to Vietnamese operation, units of the US 1st Cavalry Division were unsuccessful in discovering the enemy in their operational areas. Hiếu lured the enemy by dispatching a reduced regiment to set up an overnight camp in Phù Mỹ, knowing that enemy spies amongst the indigenous farmers would report the status of the operational troops. Hiếu positioned a motorized infantry battalion and an armored unit 10 kilometers away. Thinking they had an easy target, the enemy attacked the camp with a regiment belonging to the PAVN 3rd Division at 2:00 a.m. Alerted by the regiment's commander, Hiếu sent in the reserve forces to cut off the enemy's retreat and join forces with the defenders. After a three-hour fierce battle, the enemy reportedly left behind more than 300 dead and numerous weapons.

In August 1969 General Le Ngoc Trien replaced Hiếu as commander of the 22nd Division and Hiếu replaced the inept, but politically-connected General Phạm Quốc Thuần as commander of the 5th Division, however US officials had major reservations about this replacement, not regarding Hiếu as a dynamic leader.

Toàn Thắng 46
From May to July 1970, the 5th Division participated in the Cambodian Campaign with Operation Total Victory 46 in the Fishhook area, north of Lộc Ninh. This base area was considered to be used by the PAVN 5th Division as a headquarters location and training area and the 70th Rear Service Group which moved supplies down the Serges Jungle Highway. Elements of the PAVN 5th Division were identified along with elements of the 70th Rear Service Group and its affiliated hospitals. The division's mission was to attack and destroy the 70th and 80th Rear Service Groups: one hospital and one training center. Division elements will locate and destroy or evacuate enemy foods, ammunition, weapons and medical caches in the operational area. In preparation for the operation Hiếu with his G3, the CDAT commander and the DCAT G3 made the initial area coordination with General Casey of the 1st Cavalry Division and his G3. Upon completion of this initial coordination the Assistant Division Commander of the 5th Division, Commanding Officer of the 9th Regiment, and the DCAT G3 effected direct coordination with the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment. During the operation coordination was made by the 9th Regimental Commander and his DCAT Commander for the joint occupation of Fire Support Base Gonder by elements of the 9th Regiment and the 1st Cavalry Division. Operation Total Victory 46 was conducted in 5 phases. Phase I was the attack phase. Phase II, III and IV were search and destroy phases. Phase V was the withdrawal phase.

In mid-1970 MACV rated General Hiếu as "unsatisfactory" and recommended his relief as commander of the 5th Division.

Toàn Thắng 8/B/5
The 5th Division was notified by III Corps Headquarters on 14 October 1970, to prepare for limited combat operations in the Snuol District of Cambodia, for the purpose of destroying enemy forces, installations, and obtaining enemy information. Operation Total Victory 8/B/9 was conducted from 23 October to 10 November 1970 against the PAVN 5th Division: 174 Regiment, 275 Regiment, Z27 Recon Battalion; Rear Service Group 86, C11 (medical); C1/K2 Guerrilla force, northwest of Snuol; Guerrilla force, Snuol Town Market; Guerrilla force, K'bai Trach, southwest of Snuol. Hiếu together with his G3 Staff, was in charge of planning the details of the whole operation. The operational Task Organization was composed of 3 Task Forces: TF1 (Commanded by CO, 1st ACR), TF9 (Commanded by CO, 9th Regiment) and TF333 (Commanded by CO, 3rd Ranger GP). TF333 was entrusted the protection and security of the main supply route. The Division Operation Plan was approved by III Corps on 21 October 1970. A final coordination meeting was conducted on 22 October 1970 at Lai Khê, and was attended by all commanders involved. Operation Total Victory 8/B/5 was composed of 3 phases. Phase I: movement to contact and contact in the vicinity of Snoul. Phase II: movement north of Snoul. Phase III is the withdrawal phase.

Toàn Thắng TT02 (Snuol 1971)
In the end of 1970, Hiếu planned to lure the enemy with a regiment placed in Snuol in Cambodian territory, north of Lộc Ninh on National Route 13. The PAVN had 3 divisions (5th, 7th and 9th) operating in that area. III Corps was ready to commit all of its three Divisions (5th, 18th and 25th) in the event the North Vietnamese engaged one, two or all three divisions into the battlefield. General Trí the III Corps Commander died in a helicopter accident at the end of February 1971. General Minh, who replaced Trí, did not want to follow through with the luring plan, when 8th Task Force was succeeding in attracting the PAVN who gathered two divisions (5th and 7th) around Snuol. The beleaguered troops of 8th Task Force, when neither rescue column nor B-52 bombers were in sight, were about to raise the white flag to surrender to the PAVN. However, Hiếu executed his withdrawal plan in time to bring his troops back to Lộc Ninh. The troops' withdrawal was executed in three phases:

 * 1) on 29 May 1971, 1/8th Battalion pierced through enemy blocking line at the northern outpost to rejoin the 8th Task Force Command Post located at Snuol market;
 * 2) on 30 May 1971, 8th Task Force using 1/8th Battalion as the spear-head to pierce enemy blocking line, followed behind by 2/8th Battalion, Task Force Command Post, 1st Armored Squadron with 2/7th Battalion acting as rear cover, to withdraw from Snuol to the location defended by 3/8th Battalion, 3 kilometers Southeast of Snuol on National Route 13;
 * 3) on 31 May 1971, 3/8th Battalion replaced 1/8th Battalion as the spearhead in piercing enemy blocking line, followed by 3/9th Battalion, 2/7th Battalion, Task Force Command Post, 1st Armored Squadron with 1/8th Battalion acting as rear cover, allowing 8th Task Force to reach the border on a 3 kilometer stretch and to return to Lộc Ninh.

Regarded by US advisers as the worst ARVN Division commander, Hiếu's forces had been badly handled during the Snuol operation, and his troops, according to II Field Force, Vietnam commander Michael S. Davison, were close to mutiny. Pushed by both Abrams and Minh to relieve him, Thiệu finally acceded and in April 1971 brought Col. Lê Văn Hưng up from Phong Dinh Province to take over the battered Division. Unfortunately, Hưng was the one ARVN officer whose candidacy American advisers had specifically recommended against. To the despair of US advisers Hiếu was promoted to deputy commander of I Corps.

Easter Offensive
Following their incompetent handling of the First Battle of Quảng Trị, both Hiếu and the I Corps commander Hoàng Xuân Lãm were relieved. Lãm was replaced by Lieutenant general Ngô Quang Trưởng, who succeeded in halting the PAVN advance at the Mỹ Chánh Line. Hiếu was replaced by Lieutenant general Lâm Quang Thi.

Svay Riêng, 1974
In 1974, as Deputy Commander of Operations/III Corps, assistant to General Phạm Quốc Thuần, Hiếu applied Blitzkrieg (lightning war) tactics to alleviate the pressure exerted by the PAVN 5th Division originating from Svay Rieng Province in the Parrot's Beak area of Cambodian territory aiming at Đức Huệ base camp. Hiếu employed twenty mobile battalions to surround the Parrot's Beak area. Secondly, on April 27, he launched 49th Infantry Regiment and 7th Ranger Group through the swamp lands around Đức Huệ towards the Cambodian border, and had Republic of Vietnam Air Force airplanes attack positions of PAVN 5th Division units. In the meantime, he relied on two Regional Force battalions belonging to IV Corps to move from Mộc Hóa up north to establish blocking positions on the southwestern edge of the PAVN 5th Division's logistical base and assembly area. On 28 April, Hiếu launched eleven battalions into the battleground to conduct preliminary operation in preparation of the main offensive.

The next morning, three armored squadrons of the III Corps Assault Task Force rushed across the Cambodian border from Gò Dầu Hạ, aiming directly at PAVN 5th Division HQ. Meanwhile, a task force composing of infantry and armor of IV Corps, originating from Mộc Hóa, maneuvered across the Cambodian border into the Elephant's Foot area to threaten the retreat of the PAVN 275th Regiment. The three armored squadrons continued their three-pronged advance 16 kilometers deep into the Cambodia before they veered south toward Hậu Nghĩa, and helicopters dropped troops unexpectedly on PAVN positions, while other ARVN units conducted rapid operations into the region between Đức Huệ and Gò Dầu Hạ. On 10 May, when the last ARVN units returned to their base camp, enemy communications and supplies networks were seriously disrupted. The PAVN suffered 1,200 killed, 65 prisoners, and tons of weapons captured; while, due to speed, secrecy and coordination factors of a multi-faced operation, the ARVN suffered less than 100 casualties.

Anticorruption czar
Vice President Trần Văn Hương appointed Hiếu anticorruption czar on 10 February 1972. He occupied this position until October 1973. At that time corruption was rampant among the ARVN leadership, in the army, the administration, the police, the power authority, Air Vietnam, customs, etc. Hiếu chose to attack first the Military Pension Fund. After a five-month investigation, he presented his findings in detail on the national television on 14 July 1972.

As a result, the Defense Minister, General Nguyễn Văn Vy and seven colonels were ousted and the Military Pension Fund disbanded. Hiếu was not allowed to move on to other corruption targets. Thiệu limited Hiếu's investigative authority and prior presidential approval was necessary to commence an investigation at the level of chief of province. These limitations disappointed Hiếu who sought to return to the military and declared, "Either we correct our faults or the Communists will correct them for us."

Evaluation
I Corps American Advisors' evaluation report in May 1968:

"He is a man who possesses potential for highest rank in the Vietnamese Army. He should be sent to a CONUS school as soon as possible, preferably Ft. Leavenworth. He should be assigned to field command jobs to give him more command experience. This officer, properly handled and developed, could well become a future competent if not eminent general officer in the Vietnamese Army. His attitude toward the United States is strong, and his language fluency would be an invaluable asset to Allied operations."

Colonel John Hayes, ARVN 5th Infantry Division Senior Advisor's evaluation on 7 February 1970: "MG Nguyen Van Hieu, DOR 1-11-67, 20 years service. General Hieu is an above average commander. Good qualities include dedication, experience as a combat leader, ability to stimulate and maintain morale, and ability to control those in his command. He is quite religious and patriotic, and demands high standards of conduct and discipline. He is methodical but decisive. He is rated better than the average US Division commander in overall performance."

General Trần Văn Đôn's assessment: "In February 1972, Don, who was a LTG and is currently a Deputy Prime Minister, stated to the Consul in Da Nang that Hieu was one of the most capable generals in ARVN and "the most honest general in the Army today". The latter assessment is broadly held and frequently voiced by ARVN officers. Don further stated that he would take Hieu over virtually any ARVN general he knew."

Unanswered questions concerning his death
On 8 April 1975, news came out of III Corps headquarters in Biên Hòa that Hiếu was found dead in his office. The next day, after attending the military press conference, UPI correspondent sent out the following dispatch: ''SAIGON (UPI) - The deputy commander of South Vietnamese troops defending the Saigon area was found shot to death Tuesday night following an argument with his superior over tactics. Military sources said he apparently committed suicide. The sources said Maj. Gen. Hiếu was found with a bullet wound in his mouth at his III Corps office at the edge of Biên Hòa airbase, 14 mi northeast of Saigon. It was not known whether Hiếu's death was connected with the Tuesday morning bombing of the Presidential palace of Nguyễn Văn Thiệu.''

title: Nguyễn Văn Hiếu


text:
Nebraska State Capitol

The Nebraska State Capitol is the seat of government of the U.S. state of Nebraska and is located in downtown Lincoln. Designed by New York architect Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue in 1920, it was constructed of Indiana limestone from 1922 to 1932. The capitol houses the primary executive and judicial offices of Nebraska and is home to the Nebraska Legislature—the only unicameral state legislature in the United States.

The Nebraska State Capitol's 400 ft tower can be seen 20 mi away. It was the first state capitol to incorporate a functional tower into its design. Goodhue stated that "Nebraska is a level country and its capitol should have some altitude or beacon effect." In 1976, the National Park Service designated the capitol a National Historic Landmark, and in 1997, the Park Service extended the designation to include the capitol grounds, which Ernst H. Herminghaus designed in 1932.

Dimensions and features
The structure is anchored by a three-story, 437 ft square base. This square base houses offices most frequently visited by the public. The second floor (main floor) is home to the office of the Governor of Nebraska, the Nebraska Supreme Court, the Nebraska Court of Appeals, and the Nebraska Legislature.

From the center of the base, a tower rises 362 ft, crowned by a gold-tiled dome. The finial—The Sower and its pedestal—add an additional 32 ft to the building's height. Common measurements list the capitol at 400 ft, making it the second-tallest U.S. statehouse, surpassed only by the 450 ft Louisiana State Capitol (then-Governor of Louisiana Huey Pierce Long insisted the new Louisiana capitol be built taller than Nebraska's.).

Goodhue originally envisioned much of the tower to house the collections of the Nebraska State Library, and he planned for each of the 17 ft tower floors to include glass-floored stacks for book storage. As early as November 1920, however, Goodhue indicated that the tower could serve any purpose, including office space. By September 1925, the Capitol Commission decided that the tower should be built for office space. Tower floors continue to house various offices today.

In total, there are 15 stories in the capitol (three mechanical levels also exist within the tower between the 3rd and 4th floors). Memorial Chamber on the 14th floor—the highest publicly accessible level—has four observation decks that offer views of Lincoln from 245 ft above the ground.

Lincoln Municipal Code places height restrictions on structures within the designated Capitol Environs District. This code helps to maintain the capitol's title as the tallest building in Lincoln. The capitol held the title of tallest building in Nebraska until 1969 with the completion of the 478 ft Woodmen Tower in downtown Omaha. With the completion of Omaha's 634 ft First National Bank Tower in 2002, the capitol became the third-tallest building in Nebraska.

Capital cities, capitol buildings
Congress officially opened Nebraska Territory with the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854. Almost instantly a factional divide between North Platters (those living north of the Platte River) and South Platters (those living south of the Platte) arose over the question of capital location. Much to the chagrin of the South Platters, Acting Governor Thomas B. Cuming selected the small northern village of Omaha City for the seat of government. Cuming was from Iowa, and as his political allies were investors in the Council Bluffs and Nebraska Ferry Company, Omaha as capital would be beneficial to his personal political career. Results from the first territorial census, however, revealed 914 North Platters and 1,818 South Platters. The South Platters, with greater legislative representation, would be able to take the capital, but Cuming ignored proportional representation and assigned seven councilmen and fourteen representatives to the north and six councilmen and twelve representatives to the south. The North Platters, with greater political power, confirmed Omaha as the capital.

In Omaha, two structures served the Territory of Nebraska. The first was a two-story brick building donated by the Council Bluffs and Nebraska Ferry Company. This building, formerly located on 9th Street between Douglas and Farnam, served the Territorial Legislature for the sessions of 1855 and 1857. A second building, constructed in 1857–58 on the site of present-day Omaha Central High School, served the remaining sessions of the Territorial Legislature and the first sessions of the State Legislature beginning in 1867. In June 1867, the Third Session of the State Legislature passed Senate Bill Number 44 which "provid[ed] for the location of the Seat of Government of the State of Nebraska, and for the erection of public building thereat." The bill also created a commission (remembered as the Capital Commission) whose charge was to select a capital site somewhere within the boundaries of Seward County, the southern halves of Butler and Saunders counties, and the northern half of Lancaster County. On July 29, 1867, the Capital Commission selected the village of Lancaster as the capital city and renamed it Lincoln.

In Lincoln, two structures first served the State of Nebraska. On October 10, 1867, the Capital Commission contracted Chicago architect John Morris to build a statehouse in Lincoln on the newly platted Capitol Square (bounded by the streets of 14th and 16th, H and K). Morris designed the capitol with local limestones which began to deteriorate upon the building's completion in late 1868. By 1879, the State of Nebraska determined to replace its crumbling statehouse through piecemeal construction of a new capitol. Architect William H. Willcox designed a Renaissance Revival capitol, and the legislature appropriated $75,000 for construction of its west wing—finished in 1881. The same year, the legislature appropriated $100,000 for an east wing, which was finished in 1882. In 1883, the legislature authorized the Board of Public Lands and Buildings to raze the old capitol and construct the central portion of the Willcox design, not to exceed $450,000. The State of Nebraska finally completed its new, second state capitol in 1888. The second state capitol began to experience structural issues, especially in its foundation, within a couple of decades of its completion. After the building was deemed unsafe, the Nebraska Legislature made several attempts to fund the construction of a third state capitol.

Architectural history
On February 20, 1919, the Nebraska Legislature passed House Roll 3 which established the Nebraska Capitol Commission to oversee construction of a new statehouse. The next day, Governor McKelvie signed the bill with its emergency clause and appointed the new commission. William E. Hardy, president of Hardy Furniture Company, and Walter W. Head, vice president of the Omaha National Bank, were Republicans from Lincoln and Omaha respectively. William H. Thompson, a prominent lawyer, was a Democrat from Grand Island. The three citizen members joined the ex officio members, Governor McKelvie and State Engineer George E. Johnson, to become the Nebraska Capitol Commission.

House Roll 3 declared that the cost of the capitol was not to exceed $5 million and established the Capitol Fund, which consisted of the proceeds of a special property tax. The Capitol Commission let the Capitol Fund accrue for two years before construction in order to have ample cash reserves. Throughout construction of the capitol, the legislature extended the levy and ultimately raised the spending limit to $10 million. The Nebraska State Constitution limits state indebtedness, so most state projects must be funded on a "pay-as-you-go" basis. The State of Nebraska funded the capitol under the same principles, and the final cost, $9,800,449.07, was completely paid when the Capitol Commission dissolved in 1935.

Competition program
One of the Capitol Commission's first actions was to hire Omaha architect Thomas Rogers Kimball to serve as the commission's professional advisor. Kimball, who was president of the American Institute of Architects, devised a two-stage competition for the selection of a capitol architect. In the preliminary stage, the commission invited Nebraska architects to submit capitol designs and hired Irving Kane Pond to serve as judge. Together, Pond and the commission selected Ellery L. Davis (Lincoln), John Latenser & Sons (Omaha), and John McDonald and Alan McDonald (Omaha) to compete in the final stage. Next the commission opened the final stage to nationally known architects including: Bliss & Faville (San Francisco), Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue (New York), H. Van Buren Magonigle (New York), McKim, Mead, and White (New York), John Russell Pope (New York), Tracy & Swartwout (New York), and Paul Cret and Zantzinger, Borie and Medary (Philadelphia). Kimball wrote an innovative competition program that did not dictate plan, style, or material for the capitol. The program did state, however, the commission's desire that the architect collaborate with "sculptor, painter, and landscapist" to create a unified design. Finally, Kimball organized the competition so that the jury was selected only after the ten competitors had submitted their designs to the Capitol Commission. The designs were identified by numbers and "separate sealed envelopes contained the architects' names and plan numbers." Next, the Capitol Commission chose the first of three competition jurors, Waddy Butler Wood; the competitors chose the second, James Gamble Rogers; and Wood and Rogers chose the third, Willis Polk. On June 26, 1920, the jury chose the author of design "Number 4" as the architect of the Nebraska State Capitol. The author of design "Number 4" was Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue.

Goodhue's design
Goodhue designed the Nebraska State Capitol in a roughly Classical architectural style, and he felt "impelled to produce something quite unlike the usual...thing of the sort, with its veneered order and invariable Roman dome." Goodhue employed Classical principles of geometric form and hierarchical arrangement but eliminated the traditional use of columns, pediments, and domes. In addition to the restrained Classical vocabulary, Goodhue mixed elements of Achaemenid, Assyrian, Byzantine, Gothic, and Romanesque architecture.

Goodhue was a well-established church architect. He designed St. Bartholomew's Church (New York), the West Point Cadet Chapel, and the Church of the Intercession (New York). The Nebraska State Capitol features similar church vocabulary. The plan is a modified cross-in-square plan enclosed by a 437 ft square. Four arms radiate from a central domed rotunda, upon which rises the tower with its unarticulated windows and flat surfaces—much like an enlarged spire.

Construction
In March 1922, the Capitol Commission built an electric railroad spur from Lincoln's Burlington yards. The state-owned line ran along H Street from 7th to 14th Streets and provided an easy means for delivery of construction materials. Then on April 15, 1922, Governor Samuel R. McKelvie ceremonially broke ground, thus beginning a ten-year construction process which occurred in four phases. Building in phases allowed construction to commence before demolition of the old statehouse. With completion of the capitol's Phase 1 in 1924, state operations moved into the new structure. The old capitol was subsequently razed. On April 23, 1924—just two years into the capitol's construction—Bertram Goodhue died, and his associates formed a firm, Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue Associates, to finish the capitol and other ongoing Goodhue projects. After construction ended in 1932, the Capitol Commission hired Lincoln landscape architect Ernst Herminghaus to design the grounds.

Integrated art program
Bertram Goodhue employed two New York artists, Lee Lawrie and Hildreth Meière, in both the exterior and interior ornamentation of the Nebraska State Capitol. Lawrie, a sculptor, designed all of the engaged relief panels and buttress figures of the exterior, along with interior column capitals, doors, and fireplace surrounds. Meière, a muralist, designed the marble mosaic panels of the floors and the ceramic tile panels of the vaults.

On January 20, 1922, the Capitol Commission requested Goodhue to consult with Dr. Hartley Burr Alexander, of the University of Nebraska's department of philosophy, "to work out the inscriptions to be used on the Capitol Building." In addition to the inscriptions, Alexander began to work closely with Goodhue and Lawrie on the themes of the exterior sculptures. When Goodhue died in 1924, Alexander feared that the thematic development in future portions of the capitol would be inconsistent with the established schemes. He therefore wrote an overarching thematic program, "Nebraska State Capitol: Synopsis of Decorations and Inscriptions," in July 1926. Alexander's synopsis thus served as a guide for the remaining interior and exterior decorations, and Alexander was bestowed with the title of Thematic Consultant.

Exterior
The exterior of the Nebraska State Capitol is architecturally composed of two parts: the three-story, 437 ft square base and the 400 ft tower. Alexander envisioned the base, with its inner cross, as an emblem of the quarters of the Earth representing the drama of human experience, and he envisioned the tower as Earth's gnomon representing human ideals. The Sower—the 19.5 ft finial atop the capitol's gold-tiled dome—completes the vertical movement of the exterior symbolism representing agriculture and the "chief purpose in forming society, to sow nobler ideas of living."

Lee Lawrie designed the principal exterior decoration, representing the history of Western law. The Sower, his best-known work at the capitol, is the only work there that is in the round, or free-standing. The remaining ornamentation is engaged within the building's limestone in bas-relief, pierced, and buttress form. After Lawrie finalized his designs in plaster maquettes, the Edward Ardolino stone carving contractor employed Alessandro Beretta to execute the carving in situ. Beretta would take as long as ten weeks per panel, and use as many as 70 different tools. He finished the carving on November 19, 1934.

The Main Portal
The main portal introduces the sculpted ornamentation representing the foundation of life on the Great Plains. Two parapets adorned with relief panels of bison flank the main stairs. The bison represent Plains Indians indigenous to Nebraska, and the principal nations are inscribed within the panels (alphabetically):

 * Arapahoe
 * Arikara

 * Cheyenne
 * Kiowa

 * Pawnee
 * Ponca

 * Omaha
 * Otoe

 * Sioux
 * Winnebago

19th century European Americans are also represented above the main entrance with the gilded relief, Spirit of the Pioneers. The relief sits directly atop Alexander's inscription: "The Salvation of the State is Watchfulness in the Citizen." Additionally, an inscription at the crown of the main portal reads: "Wisdom, Justice, Power, and Mercy, Constant Guardians of the Law." Four buttress figures flank the inscription representing the aforementioned guardians.

The Promenade Circuit
The names of the ninety-three counties of Nebraska are inscribed along the top of the base of the capitol and are loosely grouped by number of letters per name. Directly above the county names, twenty-one panels (eighteen bas-reliefs, three pierced) represent the creation of law. The panels are best observed from the promenade, beginning on the northwest corner of the building:

Hebrew Law: Northwest
 * Moses Bringing the Law from Sinai
 * Deborah Judging Israel
 * The Judgement of Solomon

Greco-Roman Law: West
 * Solon Giving a New Constitution to Athens
 * The Publishing of the Twelve Tables in Rome
 * The Establishment of the Tribunate of the People

Greco-Roman Law: Southwest
 * Plato Writing His Dialog on the Ideal Republic
 * Orestes Before the Areopagites
 * The Codification of Roman Law under Justinian

Historical Documents: South (pierced panels)
 * The Signing of the Declaration of Independence
 * The Magna Carta
 * The Writing of the Constitution of the United States

English Law: Southeast
 * The Codification of Anglo-Saxon Law under Ethelbert
 * Milton Defending Free Speech before Cromwell
 * Burke Defending America in Parliament

Freedom in America: East
 * Las Casas Pleading the Cause of the Indian
 * The Signing of the Pilgrim Compact on the Mayflower
 * Lincoln and the Emancipation Proclamation

Nebraska Law: Northeast Ten buttress sculptures along the top of the capitol's south arm represent the great western lawgivers. The buttress figures are depicted in chronological order from west to east and are best observed from the south steps with the exception of the first and the last. The figures of Minos and Napoleon are best observed from the northwest and northeast courtyards respectively:
 * The Purchase of Louisiana from Napoleon
 * The Kansas-Nebraska Bill
 * The Admission of Nebraska as a State in the Union

 * Minos
 * Hammurabi

 * Moses
 * Akhnaton

 * Solon
 * Solomon

 * Julius Caesar
 * Justinian

 * Charlemagne
 * Napoleon

The Tower
Eight buttress sculptures around the base of the tower represent the ideals of culture. The buttress figures are best observed from within the four courtyards or at a distance from the sidewalk around the building:

Northwest
 * Pentaour: Dawn of History
 * Ezekiel: Cosmic Tradition

Southwest
 * Socrates: Birth of Reason
 * Marcus Aurelius: Reign of Law

Southeast
 * St. John the Apostle: Glorification of Faith
 * Louis IX: Age of Chivalry

Northeast
 * Isaac Newton: Discovery of Nature
 * Abraham Lincoln: Liberation of Peoples

Landscape
In May 1933, under ever-worsening economic conditions, the Nebraska Legislature re-appropriated the Capitol Commission's unexpended budget. With depleted funds, the commission resolved to terminate its own existence, leaving some projects like the interior murals and the courtyard fountains incomplete. In 2017, the State of Nebraska installed the originally-planned fountains in cast-bronze in each of the Capitol's four courtyards.

Interior
The interior of the Nebraska State Capitol's monumental corridor is architecturally composed of three rooms: Vestibule, Great Hall, and Rotunda. Decorations expanding upon themes of Nebraska are read in a specific sequence beginning at the main, north door. Monumental ornamentation is also found within the Governor's Suite, the Warner Legislative Chamber (former senate), the George W. Norris Legislative Chamber (unicameral), and Memorial Chamber (14th floor).

Meière designed the black and white marble mosaic panels of the Great Hall and Rotunda representing the Procession of Life. Working with Alexander, Meière drew her inspiration from the Siena Cathedral after the two toured the cathedral in the summer of 1925. Meière also drew inspiration from Siena for her ceiling designs of the Vestibule, Great Hall, and Rotunda representing Nature, Man, and Society. In addition to her thematic consultation with Alexander, Meière collaborated closely with the Rafael Guastavino Company of New York to create decorative timbrel vaulting. The vaults are composed of two types of ceramic tiles: glazed polychrome tile and unglazed acoustical terracotta tile called Rumford.

Vestibule
The Vestibule introduces the interior ornamentation of the capitol and represents Gifts of Nature. The sun is the room's central motif and is prominently featured as a medallion within the dome. The dome also incorporates mosaic images of agriculture, flora, and fauna. The vaulting is supported by the largest columns in the capitol—four 25 ft monoliths of Red Verona marble. The columns' capitals, designed by Lee Lawrie, are vaguely Corinthian and feature bull motifs inspired from ancient Persepolis architecture.

Great Hall
The Great Hall follows the Vestibule and represents Life of Man. Three medallions—Traditions of the Past, Life of the Present, and Ideals of the Future—anchor the mosaic vaulting. Additionally, sixteen mosaic panels within the arches depict scenes of human activity, including an Architect, a Ball Player, and a Scientist.

The Procession of Life begins in the Great Hall's floor with the mosaic Genius of Creative Energy—an Apollo-like figure—surrounded by Cosmic Energy, lightning, moons, orbs, etc. Three tondi (circular) mosaics follow, depicting the Spirit of the Soil, the Spirit of Vegetation, and the Spirit of Animal Life.

The Great Hall also introduces the Nebraska Hall of Fame—a collection of bronze busts of noteworthy Nebraskans. The capitol's Thematic Consultant, Hartley Burr Alexander, is among the 26 current inductees.

Rotunda
The Rotunda follows the Great Hall and represents Virtues of the State. Eight winged virtues form a celestial rose within the mosaic dome: Temperance, Wisdom, Faith, Justice, Magnanimity, Charity, Hope, and Courage.

The Procession of Life continues in the Rotunda's floor with the mosaic panel Vital Energy, which shows the Genius of Life—an Eros-like figure with butterflies and pine cones. At the Rotunda's center, four tondi mosaics representing the Genius of Water, the Genius of Fire, the Genius of Air, and the Genius of Earth surround a larger tondo mosaic of Earth as the Life-giver. A mosaic band, or guilloche, interlaces the five tondi and depicts the fossil life of the Great Plains. Meière based the fossil mosaics on scientific illustrations drawn by University of Nebraska geologist Erwin Hinckley Barbour. The Procession of Life concludes at the Rotunda's south entrance with The Family.

Warner Legislative Chamber (east)
The Warner Legislative Chamber is located to the east of the Rotunda and was originally designed for the Nebraska House of Representatives. In 1927, the Capitol Commission concluded that the chamber was of inadequate size for the representative body, so the Goodhue Associates enlarged the original west, Senate chamber design (which was not yet constructed) and reassigned it for use by the House. Upon the capitol's completion in 1932, the Capitol Commission thus reassigned the east chamber to the Nebraska Senate. The chamber served the Senate during the 1933 and 1935 legislative sessions. With the 1937 inception of the unicameral legislature, the east chamber functioned as a committee hearing room and today serves as a public gathering space. On February 4, 1998, the Ninety-Fifth Nebraska Legislature named the chamber in honor of state senators Charles Warner and Jerome Warner with the passage of Legislative Resolution 322.

The chamber represents Plains Indians—Nebraska's first inhabitants. The chamber's mahogany doors, designed by Lee Lawrie, introduce the theme and depict a woman and a man standing on either side of a tree of life comprising cornstalks. Each door weighs 750 lb, and Lincoln artisan, Keats Lorenz, executed the carving.

Meière designed the mosaic dome to emulate beadwork, and the vaulting depicts four scenes of Indian life. Alexander also shared images of indigenous art with Meière for inspiration, including ledger art by Amos Bad Heart Bull. Meière used one particular drawing depicting a Sun Dance rite for the design of a tapestry above the speaker's niche.

George W. Norris Legislative Chamber (west)
The George W. Norris Legislative Chamber is located to the west of the Rotunda. Upon the chamber's completion in 1932, it served the Nebraska House of Representatives during the 1933 and 1935 legislative sessions. In 1937, the chamber—being the larger of the two legislative halls—began to serve the unicameral legislature. On February 16, 1984, the Eighty-Eighth Nebraska Legislature named the chamber in honor of U.S. Senator George W. Norris with the passage of Legislative Resolution 257.

The chamber represents Euro-American expansion. The chamber's tooled-leather doors, designed by Meière, introduce the theme and depict a tree of life scene styled with Assyrian and Egyptian motifs.

Meière also designed the gold leaf patterns on the walnut-beamed ceiling. The dominant images depict the three Euro-American powers that have claimed the land that is today Nebraska: Spain (castle and lion), France (fleur-de-lis and honey bee), and the United States of America (shield and bald eagle).

Murals
The mural program of the capitol is composed of twenty-one defined murals throughout the monumental hallways and Law Library, and a series of allegorical scenes within the Governor's Suite.

On September 22, 1925, the Capitol Commission accepted proposals by New York artist Augustus Vincent Tack to paint rooms within the Governor's Suite—proposals begun with Bertram Goodhue prior to his death in 1924. Tack completed and installed his series of allegorical figures in November 1927.

On February 21, 1930, the Capitol Commission hired Lincoln artist Elizabeth Dolan to paint a mural on the north wall of the Law Library. Dolan completed The Spirit of the Prairie in August 1930. It is the only mural in the capitol painted in situ.

Apart from the Governor's Suite and the Law Library, Goodhue designed 20 recessed mural spaces for the monumental hallways of the capitol. In May 1933, under ever-worsening economic conditions, the Nebraska Legislature re-appropriated the Capitol Commission's unexpended budget. With depleted funds, the commission resolved to terminate its own existence, leaving the mural project incomplete.

In 1951, the Nebraska Legislature created the Capitol Mural Commission and empowered it to complete the mural program. Over the next 50 years, the Capitol Mural Commission held a series of competitions to select artists for the remaining murals. The commission also used details from Dr. Hartley Burr Alexander's original thematic plan to guide the subject matter of the murals.

Lincoln Monument

The Lincoln Monument, located on the capitol's west grounds, is composed of the 8.67 ft bronze statue, Abraham Lincoln, created by Daniel Chester French, and the corresponding granite plinth and stele, designed by architect Henry Bacon.

On February 12, 1908, the Young Men's Republican Club organized the Abraham Lincoln Memorial Association to seek funds for the erection of an Abraham Lincoln statue on the Nebraska State Capitol grounds, and on July 8, 1908, the association invited Frank M. Hall to organize a committee to commission a sculptor. The committee (including Hall, State Auditor Silas Barton, Dr. H.B. Lowry, General Charles F. Manderson, Governor Ashton C. Shallenberger, Addison Waite, and Gurdon Wattles), awarded French the commission on June 24, 1909, and the committee unveiled the monument on September 2, 1912. Bacon and French later collaborated on the Lincoln Memorial (1914–22) in Washington, D.C.

The Lincoln Monument predates the current statehouse, and the Capitol Commission drew special attention to the monument during the final stage of competition to select an architect for a new capitol in 1920. In a note to the competing architects, the commission wrote, "Solutions should consider this monument and suggest for it a proper part in the ensemble, preferably but not imperatively on the building site proper." Construction of the new capitol commenced in 1922, and the Lincoln Monument remained intact.

Social history
Because of its prominent tower the capitol is popularly nicknamed "Tower on the Plains" or "Penis of the Plains."

The capitol and its grounds are a frequent site of political demonstrations, rallies, and news conferences.

Social history timeline

 * July 1934: Lincolnites sleep on capitol lawn during heatwave; Capitol Commission worries blankets will kill grass
 * January 16, 1935: Dan Hellweg dies after jumping from the fourteenth floor
 * June 13, 1935: Mari Sandoz receives telegram at her Nebraska State Historical Society office on the ninth floor announcing that she won the Atlantic Monthly Press nonfiction contest for her biography Old Jules
 * October 10, 1936: President Franklin D. Roosevelt addresses a crowd of 30,000 in front of the north entrance[[File:Nebraska National Guard Soldiers during the George Floyd protests, May 31, 2020.jpg|200px|thumb|[[Nebraska National Guard]] and state troopers at the Capitol on May 31, 2020, during the George Floyd protests]]
 * November 13, 1945: Roy Kohler dies after falling or jumping from the fourteenth floor
 * December 31, 1948: State installs wire fencing above parapet wall of the fourteenth floor observation decks to prevent falls or jumps
 * May 29, 1954: Dick Cavett "sloshes" white paint on the statue of William Jennings Bryan, which stands on the capitol's north plaza
 * February 12, 2001: Same-sex couples hold wedding ceremonies on the west steps of the Capitol, showing support for legalization of same-sex marriage as a part of National Freedom to Marry Day.
 * April 10, 2002: Nebraska Coalition for LGBT Civil Rights organizes a human chain around the Capitol in protest of Nebraska Initiative 416.
 * July 17, 2004: Neo-nazis hold a rally at the north steps of the Capitol. The rally was opposed by a far larger anti-Nazi counterprotest.
 * July 12, 2005: The body of James Exon lay in state in the Capitol rotunda.
 * May 30–31, 2020: Police fire CS gas and rubber bullets at Black Lives Matter demonstrators protesting police brutality at the Capitol and on Lincoln Mall, to the west of the building. While protestors had their hands up, police shot them in the face; one was blinded and another suffered a shattered nose.

title: Nebraska State Capitol


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hitler has only got one ball

 * Delete This has to be bullshit ExplorerCDT 02:33, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Comment: Who cares about the song? It's non-encyclopedic. (unsigned comment by ExplorerCDT)
 * Keep. I found this page when I wanted to check whether Hitler really had one ball, and it appeared not to be true. So this page is certainly usefull --Mixcoatl 00:41, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep This really is not bullshit. Did you even bother to read it or check any of the external links or the discussion page? older ≠ wiser 02:37, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Sorry, anyone who knows their history would know there wasn't an autopsy of Hitler because his body was burned beyond recognition allegedly by Russian soldiers entering Berlin. Hitler having one testical is an urban legend without any substantiation.  However, as regarding this VFD, this page is bullshit and should be deleted summarily.ExplorerCDT 02:41, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Whether or not Hitler actually had one ball is entirely tangential to this article which is about various actual song lyrics. older ≠ wiser 02:46, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep ... it's about the song, not the allegation. It could be written and trimmed quite a lot, but not killed. - DavidWBrooks 02:44, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I forgot. ExplorerCDT 03:00, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete on the grounds that it really belongs in the Wikisource archives. I could see a passing reference to this item as a curiousity on some other page, but do not think it merits a standalone page. -Joseph (Talk) 02:50, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)
 * Is there are reason why this does not appear on Votes for deletion? older ≠ wiser 19:26, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Aenar

entheogens and animal hallucinogens
first, this is from the Category_talk:Entheogens talk page-
 * I completely agree; that is the general tone of the article. more editing might need to be done then; for instance, most of the 2C-B etc articles start off with "an entheogen in the phenethylamine class . . . " but we have some standard usage of "entheogen" as opposed to "hallucinogen" and set up the category accordingly. --Heah 16:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

i've change all the cat removal edits from User:80.203.115.12 to Category:Hallucinogenic tryptamine carriers, as they certainly are related to hallucinogenic tryptamines, but i see his/her point- ayahuasca, for instance, is not a tryptamine, it is a concoction containing tryptamines. i've also added psychoactive toads to this; i'm not sure if animal hallucinogens warrants its own category, as i beleive that this is the only entry that would fit there. thanks--Heah 19:38, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

new wikiproject
Hi Aenar, i've sort of outlined a new wikiproject focusing on hallucinogens, as a descendant of the drug project, on the project:drugs talk page and thought you might perhaps be interested. --Heah 03:04, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

reasons behind removal of entheogen category from psilocybin?
Hello Aenar,

I've reverted your edit over at Psilocybin, the one where you took psilocybin out of the entheogen category. Just in case I'm missing something, could you explain your reasoning for eliminating the category? I think it's a pretty good fit; psilocybin is often popularly referred to as an entheogen, and the Wiki category even contains articles about psilocybin-containing mushroom species. --  — I. Neschek |  talk 17:49, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Hello Neschek. Please look at Category:Entheogens and its talk page, where I have described the reasoning. Regarding psilocybin, I kept Psychedelic mushrooms, but removed Psilocybin as the compound in itself doesn't have a history of entheogenic usages.

ACC Request
Aenar,

I have reviewed your username request at WP:ACC snd have declined it. You would be better suited I think by requesting a name change here. This way, you will not lose your contributions, edit count, etc. Feel free to message me on my talk page if you have any questions. Take care - Pax85 (talk) 04:19, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aenar


text:
File:AlDurrah2.jpg

Description: Jamal and Muhammad al-Durrah incident taking cover, Gaza Strip, September 30, 2000

Source: Images that shook the world, BBC News, October 2, 2000.

Copyright: France 2

Rationale for Muhammad al-Durrah incident
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws, and the stricter requirements of Wikipedia's non-free content policies, because:
 * 1) It is an historically significant and iconic image.
 * 2) It is of lower resolution than the original. Copies made from it will be of inferior quality.
 * 3) The image has no monetary value that our use of it would affect.
 * 4) It has been widely distributed free of charge by the copyright holder.
 * 5) It is being used for informational purposes in an article about the event it depicts.
 * 6) The imagery and its historical significance are a key part of the story and the article would be significantly poorer without it.
 * 7) The significance of this image is that it shows the father waving in the direction of the Israeli post, toward his killers according to commentators who believe the pair were shot by the IDF, possibly asking them to stop firing, or at least attempting to make his presence known -- though other frames show him looking in other directions too.

title: File:AlDurrah2.jpg


text:
Talk:Petrov Affair

Petrov Affair Exhibition--nixie 02:39, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

MVD or KGB
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KGB#The_Evolution_of_the_KGB says that the MVD became the KGB in 1953.

Yet here, in 1954, Petrov is called a member of the MVD.

Surely it should say KGB?

203.39.103.26 (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

The Beria connection
The comment to the effect that "The Petrovs had been sent to the Canberra embassy in 1951 by the Soviet security chief, Lavrenty Beria" is a bit off. Beria had lost his "security chief" position in January 1946 and didn't resume direct control of the Soviet security and intelligence agencies until after Stalin's death in March 1953.

Beria did exercise a degree of influence on the security apparatus in 1946-1953, though, so it's possible that Petrov was "Beria's man" and hence afraid to return to the USSR after Beria's fall. However, it's also possible that Petrov, who was, after all, only a colonel, had nothing to do with Beria and had other reasons to defect. The new Soviet leadership purged its security apparatus rather thoroughly in 1953-1954 and Petrov had reasons to be worried even if he was not a direct protege of one of the newly appointed fall guys like Abakumov and Beria.

Anyway, a source for Petrov's motives (his autobio? the 1987 Manne book?) would be nice. Ahasuerus 23:57, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Evdokia's liberation from MVD
The article states that Evdokia Petrov was separated by 'ASIO agents' from her MVD minders - there are two problems with this: 1) She was not separated by ASIO 'agents', but by Northern Territory police officers. There are photographs that confirm this. 2) On a more minor note, ASIO employees should not be referred to as 'agents'. They are correctly called 'officers' as 'agents' is an American term that has a completely different meaning in the Commonwealth realms that follow the security service model established by MI5. I have changed the article accordingly. DirectEdge 23:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It seems that someone changed it back. Also, I was under taught that it was the federal police who were able to take her back because the Russian MVD were carrying guns. 202.169.180.204 (talk) 05:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Total lack of discussion of Venona
The failure to discuss the Venona project in this article is a major omission which should be rectified. For those interested, one place to start is Nigel West's Venona (London: HarperCollins, 2000), 95-121. Rgr09 (talk) 08:47, 23 February 2013 (UTC) ---
 * The Wikipedia article on the Petrov Affair- which this talk section is adjacent to - is a very good scissor cutting of paper accomplishment around the affair as public experience. The article gives it exactly as the public received it.

 * To introduce the Venona project which has a Wikipedia entry for itself - Venona project - would create complications of layers of information which would be outside the definition of the public event which the Wiki article agreeably confines itself to.

 * With a little beach browsing or bush walking on the web it is possible to find the exposition of information Rgr09 would like to be brought into a Wiki discussion or something of what he thinks should be (or other). It is here in heading II (of VIII headings) entitled THE VENONA OPERATION
 * Cain, Frank -- "Australian Intelligence Organisations and the Law: A Brief History" [2004] UNSWLawJl 23; (2004) 27(2) University of New South Wales Law Journal 296. http://www.worldlii.org/au/journals/UNSWLJ/2004/23.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurencebeck (talk • contribs) 01:12, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 * It is to be noted with the raising of ne'er one eyebrow that in an adjournment debate (An adjournment debate is at the end of each sitting day when members and senators make short speeches on any subject.) in the Australian Senate on 16th June 2011 in the speech by Steve Hutchins (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Soviet Espionage In Australia, there is elided any mention of, nor reference to Petrov. Venona is given of a compelling nature in three instances.
 * http://www.openaustralia.org/senate/?gid=2011-06-16.323.2
 * It may be intended to be assumed by that apparently meaningful elision that the Petrov Affair had further agenda to its public timeline and which has remained hidden and is sensitive to the greater revelations in and the subsequent responses to the Venona decrypts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laurencebeck (talk • contribs) 04:15, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 02:47, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Petrov Affair. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717073830/http://www.qld.gov.au/about/events-awards-honours/awards/literary-awards/past-winners/ to http://www.qld.gov.au/about/events-awards-honours/awards/literary-awards/past-winners/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:42, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Colonel or Lieutenant Colonel?
The National Museum of Australia says Lt Col: --Jack Upland (talk) 20:29, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Petrov Affair


text:
File:AlDurrah3.jpg

Description: Jamal and Muhammad al-Durrah just after the reported shooting, Gaza Strip, September 30, 2000

Source: Images that shook the world, BBC News, October 2, 2000.

Copyright: France 2

Rationale for Muhammad al-Durrah incident
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws, and the stricter requirements of Wikipedia's non-free content policies, because:
 * 1) It is an historically significant and iconic image.
 * 2) It is of lower resolution than the original. Copies made from it will be of inferior quality.
 * 3) The image has no monetary value that our use of it would affect.
 * 4) It has been widely distributed free of charge by the copyright holder.
 * 5) It is being used for informational purposes in an article about the event it depicts.
 * 6) The imagery and its historical significance are a key part of the story and the article would be significantly poorer without it.
 * 7) The significance of this image is that it was the last frame that France 2 broadcast of the shooting sequence, after which they announced that the boy had died, giving the impression that this frame shows his death. In fact, it does not. There was a further, final frame in which he is seen to move his arm, hand, and leg. It was the implication that this frame was the final one that has caused the controversy.

title: File:AlDurrah3.jpg


text:
University of Houston System

The University of Houston System is a public university system in the U.S. state of Texas, comprising four separate and distinct universities. It also owns and holds broadcasting licenses to a public television station (KUHT) and a public radio station (KUHF).

The fourth-largest university system in Texas, the UH System has more than 70,000 students and 495,000 alumni from the four distinct universities. Its flagship institution is the University of Houston, a comprehensive doctoral degree-granting research university of about 43,000 students. The economic impact of the UH System contributes over $3 billion annually to the Texas economy, while generating about 24,000 jobs.

The administration is housed in the Ezekiel W. Cullen Building, located on the campus of the University of Houston. The chancellor of the UH System is Renu Khator, who serves concurrently as president of the University of Houston. The System is governed by nine voting-member board of regents, appointed by the Governor of Texas.

History
The University of Houston, founded in 1927, entered the state system of higher education in 1963. The evolvement of a multi-institution University of Houston System came from a recommendation in May 1968 which called for the creation of a university near NASA's Manned Spacecraft Center to offer upper-division and graduate-level programs. By 1971, the 62nd Texas Legislature passed House Bill 199 authorizing the establishment of the University of Houston at Clear Lake City as a separate and distinct institution with the organization and control vested in the Board of Regents of the University of Houston.

Recognizing the need for a university presence in Downtown Houston, the board of regents acquired the assets of South Texas Junior College on August 6, 1974 and opened the University of Houston–Downtown College (UH/DC) as a four-year institution under the organization and control of the University of Houston. By August 1979, it became a stand-alone university when the 66th Texas Legislature established UH/DC as a separate and distinct institution in the University of Houston System.

The University of Houston System was created by statute on August 29, 1977, under House Bill 188 during the 65th Texas Legislature. The Board of Regents of the University of Houston was renamed the Board of Regents of the University of Houston System. Philip G. Hoffman became the first chancellor of the System, after serving as president of the University of Houston from 1961 to 1977.

During the 68th Texas Legislature, Senate Bill 235 (SB 235) was signed into law and became effective immediately on April 26, 1983. The bill statutorily established the University of Houston–Victoria as a separate and distinct institution in the University of Houston System, and allowed the university system to acquire and dispose of land or other real property outside of Harris County. In addition, SB 235 changed the names of existing UH System institutions as follows:
 * University of Houston was renamed University of Houston–University Park;
 * University of Houston at Clear Lake City was renamed University of Houston–Clear Lake; and
 * University of Houston–Downtown College was renamed University of Houston–Downtown.

A proposal to reorganize and consolidate state university systems emerged in 1986. The UH System would have been merged into a new university system to include a total of 10 institutions under the recommended reorganization referred to as the "Gulf Coast System." The proposed consolidation grouping drew oppositions from affected institutions, and the plan never materialized.

In 1991, the University of Houston–University Park reverted to its original name: University of Houston. The addition of the "University Park" appellation was done with little discussion and had never gained community acceptance.

In 1997, the administrations of the UH System and the University of Houston were combined under a single chief executive officer, with the dual title of Chancellor of the UH System and President of the University of Houston. Arthur K. Smith became the first person to have held the combined position.

In November 2007, Renu Khator was selected as the eighth chancellor of the University of Houston System and thirteenth president of the University of Houston. Khator became the first female to hold the chancellorship position, and took office in January 2008. She is the third person to hold the dual role of UH System chancellor and UH president.

On November 16, 2011, the University of Houston System announced that the University of Houston as an institution would replace the university system as the administrative entity for the University of Houston System at Sugar Land. With this action, the campus was renamed the "University of Houston Sugar Land" in January 2012.

Governance
The governance, control, jurisdiction, organization, and management of the University of Houston System is vested in its board of regents. The board has all the rights, powers, and duties that it has with respect to the organization and control of the four component institutions in the System; however, each component institution is maintained as a separate and distinct university.

The Board consists of a chair, vice-chair, secretary, and seven other members, including one student who serves a one-year term as regent. Every two years, the Governor of Texas, subject to the confirmation of the Texas Senate, appoints three members to the board of regents. Every member except for the student regent serves a six-year term. Responsibilities for members are specifically listed in the bylaws of the board of regents.

The chairman of the board of regents is Tilman J. Fertitta, CEO of Landry's, Inc. Fertitta attended the University of Houston, and was a student in the Hilton College. He was appointed to the board in 2009, and will serve through August 31, 2027—having been reappointed for an additional six-year term.

Administration
The chancellor is the chief executive officer of the University of Houston System. The chancellor, appointed by the System's board of regents, has certain authorities that are specified in the regent bylaws. The chancellor has the option to delegate responsibilities to others such as the vice-chancellor, university presidents, and university athletic directors. Such delegations are subject to the board of regents bylaws and UH System policies.

Since 1997, the UH System chancellor has been serving concurrently as the President of the University of Houston. Thus, the chancellor holds a dual role. As of January 2008, Renu Khator has been the chancellor of UH System and president of the University of Houston. The administration of the System is located in the Ezekiel W. Cullen Building on the campus of the University of Houston.

The Chancellor's official residence is known as the "Wortham House." The house was designed by Alfred C. Finn, and built by Frank P. Sterling in 1925 as the "Sterling House." In 1948, the house was donated to the Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, and later sold to Gus and Lyndall Wortham in 1951. Upon her death in July 1980, Lyndall Wortham donated the property to the University of Houston. The house, located in the Houston neighborhood of Southampton, serves as a facility for small functions or gatherings of the UH System.

Component institutions
At present, the University of Houston System is self described as a "four-university organization" consisting of the campuses listed below. These campuses are under the control of the board of regents and chancellor. Each institution is a stand-alone university, confers its own degrees, and maintain additional instruction sites within the Houston Metropolitan area.

Off campus branches
Each university has additional instruction sites that make education accessible to the greater population of Houston. Each are degree-granting, and students have the same status as other University of Houston students. The following are schools and their respective off campus branches:

University of Houston
 * UH at Sugar Land
 * UH at Katy

University of Houston-Clear Lake
 * UHCL at Pearland
 * UHCL at the Texas Medical Center

University of Houston-Downtown
 * UHD Northwest
 * UHD at Lone Star College - Cy-Fair
 * UHD at Lone Star College - Kingwood
 * UHD at Houston Community College - Coleman

University of Houston-Victoria
 * UHV at Katy

Other Enterprises
The University of Houston system owns and operates various facilities, centers, and institutes:

University of Houston
 * University of Houston Coastal Center - the home of the Texas Institute for Coastal Prairie Research and Education
 * UH Observatory
 * Advanced Manufacturing Institute (AMI)
 * Center for Carbon Management in Energy (CCME)
 * HEALTH Research Institute
 * Hewlett Packard Enterprise Data Science Institute (HPE DSI)
 * Humana Integrated Health System Sciences Institute
 * Hurricane Resilience Research Institute (HuRRI)
 * Texas Center for Superconductivity at UH (TcSUH)
 * Texas Institute for Measurement, Evaluation and Statistics (TIMES)
 * Community Design Resource Center
 * DesignLAB
 * Blaffer Art Museum
 * Cynthia Woods Mitchell Center for the Arts
 * AIM Center for Investment Management
 * Dakri Center for Economic Inclusion
 * Gutierrez Energy Management Institute
 * Institute for Regional Forecasting
 * Stagner Sales Excellence Institute
 * UH Small Business Development Center
 * Wolff Center for Entrepreneurship
 * Subsea Institute
 * Center for Information Security Research and Education
 * Center for Life Sciences Technology
 * Computational Biology & Medicine Laboratory
 * Optical Bioimaging Lab
 * Power and Energy Conversion (PEC) Lab
 * UX Lab
 * Wireless and Optical Networking Lab
 * Blakely Advocacy Institute
 * Criminal Justice Institute (CJI)
 * Health Law & Policy Institute
 * Institute for Intellectual Property & Information Law (IPIL)
 * The Texas Innocence Network (TIN)
 * Arte Público Press
 * Texas Center for Learning Disabilities
 * Methodist Sugar Land Hospital Nursing Simulation Center
 * HCA Houston Healthcare Nursing Simulation Center
 * The Center for Experimental Therapeutics & Pharmacoinformatics (CEPT)
 * The Heart and Kidney Institute (HKI)
 * The Institute of Community Health (ICH)
 * The Prescription Drug Misuse Education and Research (PREMIER) Center
 * Hub for Engaged Action Research Lab
 * Child and Family Center for Innovative Research (CFCIR)
 * Mental Health Research Innovation Treatment Engagement Service Research Center (MH-RITES)
 * SUSTAIN Wellbeing COMPASS Coordinating Center
 * Center for Public Policy
 * Elizabeth D. Rockwell Center on Ethics and Leadership (EDR Center)

University of Houston-Clear Lake
 * Diplomacy Institute
 * Environmental Institute of Houston
 * Health and Human Performance Institute
 * Institute for Human and Planetary Sustainability
 * Center for Robotics Software
 * Center for Autism and Developmental Disabilities
 * Psychological Services Clinic
 * McWhirter Professional Development Laboratory School
 * Center for Workplace Consulting

University of Houston-Downtown
 * Center for Community Engagement and Service Learning
 * Center for Critical Race Studies
 * Center for Public Service and Community Research
 * Center for Latino Studies
 * Center for Public Deliberation
 * Center for Plain English Research and Study
 * Center for Public Deliberation
 * Center for Diversity & Inclusion
 * Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence
 * Center for Urban Agriculture and Sustainability
 * Cultural Enrichment Center
 * Institute for Business, Ethics, and Public Issues
 * Insurance & Risk Management Center

University of Houston-Victoria
 * Victoria Alliance Against Chronic Kidney Disease
 * Small Business Development Center
 * Center for Regional Collaboration
 * Martín De León Symposium on the Humanities
 * A.D. Sheffield Symposium on African American History

title: University of Houston System


text:
User talk:Megan 189

How do I see my own and someone else's edit count?

 * See WikiProject edit counters - the best way is Interior's tool, although the information isn't up-to-date at present. It would give you a display like this. Another way is to view your contributions from the link on the sidebar, choose a limit per page and then edit that limit in the address bar of your browser until most of the your edits are on one page, and then count up the number of edits on the next page and add it on. As I type, you have 116, but remember that editcountitis can be fatal.

 * Incidentally, you can sign comments on Talk pages using four tildes like so: ~ . Cheers. —Wh o  uk (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for joining the QRVS. We are always happy to have new members. General Eisenhower

Attention!
Replace with  (reason stated at WP:UB). The Republican 20:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Quick Question
When I go to log into my account, my username is always showing (and I don't need to type it in). Is there any way that I can clear it?QuizQuick 19:10, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Community Justice Newsletter
 Community Justice Newsletter

Concordia newsletter
 Concordia Newsletter Community Justice is no more. It has been reformed to Concordia. Membership has been transferred.

Concordia is an organization of editors on Wikipedia that strive to encourage civility and fair treatment among all editors in the Wikipedian community, from the Wikignome to the Wikiholic. The project was designed to have a friendly and helpful environment to support any unfortunate Wikipedians that have become victims of incivility, hostility, or continual disrespect.

We currently need help in getting going, and making the community understand our aims. We work for civility. Nothing more, nothing less.

If you have ideas, let us know at our talk page, or on the IRC channel. We aim to spread civility in every way we can.

Should you wish to unsubscribe to future newsletters, please add your name to Concordia/Do Not Spam.

Thank you for your time. If you need anything, feel free to comment at WT:CCD or come into our IRC channel.

- The Concordia council. Delivered by Ian13 13:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Concordia Newsletter
NEWSLETTER

Concordia is currently trying to relaunch. I, and all the members of the ex-council, wish to welcome new members to the group. We are a group who aim to promote remaining civil, in an environment where messages can easily be interpretated wrongly.

Help out now!
We are a community, so can only work though community contributions and support. It's the helping that counts.
 * Try and help people remain civil! Talk to them, and help them in any way possible. Do not be afraid to use the talk page.
 * Give people the Civility Barnstar.
 * Make and spread some Wikitokens so people know there are people to help if they want assistance.
 * Add banners or logos to your userpage to show your support.
 * Suggest some ideas! Add 'em to the talk page.

Decision Making
The council expired one month ago, but due to the current position of the group the current council will remain until the position of the group can be assessed, and whether it would be sensible to keep Concordia going. For most decisions, however, it will be decided by all who choose to partake in discussions. I am trying to relaunch because of the vast amounts of new members we have received, demonstrating that the aims are supported.

If you wish to opt of of further talk-page communications, just let us know here.

- Ian ¹³  /t  20:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC). Kindly delivered by MiszaBot.

Nomination of Shuttlecraft (Star Trek) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shuttlecraft (Star Trek) 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/Shuttlecraft (Star Trek) 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 good 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 template from the top of the article. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Megan 189


text:
User talk:EEMalinoski

Reflection Paper for WS 240 – Activism project

To examine LGBT activism, we chose to watch a documentary on Gay Weddings, interview two LGBT activists, and attend a meeting of the University of Michigan LGBT Commission. All four people or groups employed similar strategies even though they had differing conceptions of the societal norms and pressures constraining the LGBT community and its members.

All of the activists framed their work in either liberal/reform or radical perspectives. The liberal approach to feminsm works more through existing policies and procedures, focusing on one issue at a time and patterning its behavior "in such a way as to mimic heterosexual society so as to minimize the glaring difference between us and them" (Cohen, 2004, p.499/cp 297). In direct contrast, radical feminism challenges the social construction of categories that keep power and oppression as the major determinates in today's society (DuBois, 2005, p. 635). All of the activists also worked with very specific audiences in mind - demonstrating that not only does the producer affect the audience, but the nature of the audience affects the production of a message (e.g. Lotz, 2004, p. 34).

The producers of Gay Weddings took a liberal (or reform) view. They saw the problem as one of people being denied equal rights due to an irrelevant social identity, and therefore they worked to get gays and lesbians access to existing social and legal arrangements. The producers as well as the subjects themselves took great pains to frame their experiences as things that all "normal" couples do when they are getting married, sending the sub conscious message that "we deserve the same as everyone else." The LGBT Commission also took a more liberal approach, framing the problem as the isolation and discrimination the LGBT community can face on the University of Michigan campus. Its stated goal is equality for the LGBT community, and it works within the framework of student government to reach that goal. In contrast, LGBT Coming Out Group facilitator Andrew McBride took a much more radical approach, challenging heteronormativity in general as well as society’s very foundation, which he saw as fundamentally flawed. As an activist, McBride sought to uproot society’s violence, injustice, and inequity on both a macroscopic and microscopic scale. Similarly, Jaya Kalra, the co-chair of Stonewall Democrats, framed the problem as being about issues regarding power and oppression and the subsequent marginalization of minority groups.

Not surprisingly, given its overall liberal strategy, the documentary Gay Weddings had the gay couples behave in "the same way that heterosexual couples would have." This is expecially unsurprising given that the majority of the audience is heterosexual and the goal of the documentary is to persuade this audience to empathize with the couples. From the beginning, where the lovers described how they had met one another, to the search for a place to hold the ceremony, to shopping for that all-important ring, to rehearsal dinners and finally the ceremony itself, the producers took sharp pains to frame every aspect of the couples experience as a valid and appropriate one, wherin two people experienced the exact same trials, tribulations, triumphs, and happiness that any couple would have been faced with. It is interesting to note that the documentary included men and women of varying races and socio-economic classes - most probably in an effort to include all aspects of the audience. Even if a heterosexual woman of color couldn't identify with some of the themes put forth in this documentary, perhaps she identified with some of the racism encountered by one of the couples. The couples that were included in the documetary were carefully picked and chosen as to appeal to as great an audience as possible in order to bring home the central message of equality and entitlement.

Likewise, the strategies the LGBT Commission used alligned with its overall liberal strategy. It uses the conventional tools of student government to create supportive social networks and raise the visibility of the LGBT community as normal people. It does this by putting on social events to help people meet each other in a comfortable environment. It also hosts picnics, movies, dances, speakers, and events such as Pride Week and Coming Out Week, which allow members of this community to celebrate their identity while becoming more visible. These strategies bear certain similarities to those used in Gay Weddings in that they portray LGBT identities as normal and acceptable. However, the LGBT Commission's efforts are primarily targeted at members of the LGBT community rather than at heterosexuals. Here conventional strategies are used not so much to persuade heterosexuals that LBGT individuals are just like them, rather they are used to make the community itself feel more comfortable and safe.

Surprisingly enough, given the different conceptions of the problem, the strategies of the two more radical activists were not that different from the strategies of the LGBT Commission. That is to say they were not using provocative and overtly confrontational strategies like those of ACT-UP. Instead, they were using conventional political strategies, but interpreting them in a more radical light. For example, Andrew is a facilitator of the Coming Out Group, which facilitates the exploration and coming out process for people who are or think they may be LGBT. This is somewhat similar to the LGBT Commission's efforts to make the campus a more LGBT friendly place, but Andrew interpreted the action as a political act; it leads people to have a different view of politics and support different candidates and issues. He also pointed out that although his goal may be to completely change society, sometimes it's only possible to make smaller, less radical changes. Jaya Kalra, co-chair of the Stonewall Democrats, also saw her work as affecting the local campus population, but eventually hopes that local changes will lead to larger state and political ones. Her target audience, though primarily the LGBT community, is really all marginilized groups, as evident through the Stonewall Democrats latest campaigns to rally for both the Michigan Civil Rights Initiative and the Raise the Minimum Wage Campaign.

On the whole, these different experiences tell us that the LGBT/Feminist movement spans the whole spectrum of ways to conceptualize the problem activists face. Despite those differences, their strategies did not differ all that much and were fairly liberal. This is a surprising result. Although we can't say for sure why this is the case, it may be that there are more barriers to using radical strategies (for example more hostility from other people) than there are to holding radical beliefs.

References Cited:

Cohen, C. (2004). Punks, Bulldaggers and welfare queens: The radical potential of queer politics. In L. Richardson, V. Taylor, & N. Whittier (Eds.) Feminist Frontiers, 6th ed. (pp. 512-14). Boston:McGraw Hill

DuBois, E.C. & Dumenil, L. (2005). Through Women's Eyes: An American History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's Press. Chtr 10, Feminism and Its Discontents, 1965 to the Present. (pp. 628-664)

Lotz, A.D. (2004). Textual (Im)Possibilities in the U.S. Post- Network Era: Negotiating Production and Promotion Processes on Lifetime's Any Day Now. Critical Studies in Media Communication: 21 (1) March 2004, pp. 23-43

title: User talk:EEMalinoski