text:
Chud

Chud or Chude (чудь, tšuudi, čuhti) is a term historically applied in the early East Slavic annals to several Baltic Finnic peoples in the area of what is now Estonia, Karelia and Northwestern Russia. It has also been used to refer to other Finno-Ugric peoples.

Arguably, the earliest attested written use of the word "Chuds" to describe Baltic Finnic peoples (presumably early Estonians) was c. 1100, in the earliest East Slavic chronicles. According to the Primary Chronicle, the invading troops of Yaroslav I the Wise defeated "Chuds" in a battle in 1030 and then established the fort of "Yuryev" (in what is now Tartu, Estonia).

According to Old East Slavic chronicles, the Chuds were among the founders of the Rus' state.

Etymology
There are a number of hypotheses as to the origin of the term. Chud could be derived from the Slavic word tjudjo ('foreign' or 'strange'), which in turn is derived from the Gothic word meaning 'folk' (compare Teutonic). Another hypothesis is that the term was derived from a transformation of the Finno-Ugric name for the wood grouse. Yet another hypothesis contends that it is derived from the Sami word tshudde or čuđđe, meaning an enemy or adversary (vainolainen). This, however, would have required prominent Sami presence in trading centers around Lake Ladoga.

Identity
Chuds have traditionally been believed to belong to the group of Baltic-Finnic peoples, though there have been some debate as to which specific group. After the first encounter with the Chuds, Slavic people tended to call other Finnic-speaking peoples Chuds, and thus became a collective name for the Finno-Ugric neighbours in Russian cultural tradition. Many writers contend that the Chuds were Vepsians, Fasmer posits them in Karelia while Smirnov suggests the Setos are descendants of the Chuds. In recent research on toponymy of the Luga and Volkhov river catchment areas Finnish fennougrist Pauli Rahkonen has come to the conclusion, that the language spoken in the area has been Finnic only in the vicinity of the southern coasts of Lake Ladoga and the Gulf of Finland, but more upstream of the two rivers, the language, as based on the evidence of hydronyms in the area, has represented other Finno-Ugric languages than Finnic. However, the Zavoloshka Chuds in the White Sea catchment area seem to have spoken Finnic languages based on the evidence of substrate toponymy in northern Russia carried out recently by Finnish Finno-Ugrist Janne Saarikivi.

Chuds in chronicles
The East Slavic Primary Chronicle describes Chuds as co-founders of the Rus' Khaganate state along with Krivichs, Veps, Ilmen Slavs and Vikings. In other ancient East Slavic chronicles, the term "Chuds" refers to several Finnic tribes, early Estonian groups in particular. In 1030, Prince Yaroslav the Wise of Kiev won a military campaign against the Chuds and established a fort in Yuryev (present day Tartu, in southeastern Estonia). Kievan rulers then collected tribute from the Chuds of the surrounding ancient Estonian county of Ugaunia, possibly until 1061, when, according to the chronicles, Yuryev was burned down by Estonian tribe called Sosols (probably Sackalians, Oeselians or Harionenses). Most of the raids against Chuds described in medieval East Slavic chronicles occur in present-day Estonia. The border lake between Estonia and Russia is still called Chudskoye (Chud Lake) in Russian. However, many ancient references to Chuds talk of peoples very far from Estonia, like Zavoloshka Chuds between Mordovians and Komis.

Chuds in folklore
In Russian folk legends, the Chuds were described as exalted and beautiful. One characteristic of the Chuds was 'white-eyed', which means lightly colored eyes.

Russian bylinas reminisce about the destruction of the Chuds when the Slavs were occupying their territories. When a Chud township was attacked, Chud women drowned themselves, along with their jewels and children, in order to avoid robbery or rape.

In the chronicles which narrate about the founding of Russia, the Chuds are mentioned as one of the founder races, with the Slav and the Varyags (Varangians).

Folk etymology derives the word from Old East Slavic language (chuzhoi, 'foreign'; or chudnoi 'odd'; or chud 'weird'), or alternatively from chudnyi, wonderful, miraculous, excellent, attractive.

Chuds or Tchuds are traditional generic villains in some Sami legends, as well as in the Sami-language movie Pathfinder from 1987, which is loosely based on such legends.

Use of term in historical times

Later, the word Chuds was more often used for more eastern Finnic peoples, Veps and Votes in particular, while some derivatives of chud like chukhna or chukhonets were applied to more western Finns and Estonians. Following the Russian conquests of Finland 1714–1809, and increasing contacts between Finns and Saint Petersburg, Finns perceived the word Chud to be disparaging and hinting at the serfdom that the Russians were believed to find fit for the Finns. However, as a disparaging word, it was rather chukhna that was applied also to Finns and Estonians as late as during the Winter War, 1939–1940, between the Soviet Union and Finland.

In present-day Russian vernacular, the word chukhna is often used to denote the Veps. The name Chuds (or Northern Chuds) has been used for Veps people also by some anthropologists.

In the mytho-poetical tradition of the Komi, the word chud can also designate Komi heroes and heathens; Old Believers; another people different from the Komi; or robbers—the latter two are the typical legends in Sámi folklore. In fact, the legends about Chuds (Čuđit) cover a large area in northern Europe from Scandinavia to the Urals, bounded by Lake Ladoga in the south, the northern and eastern districts of the Vologda province, and passing by the Kirov region, further into Komi-Permyak Okrug. It has from this area spread to Trans-Ural region through mediation of migrants from European North.

Chud has become a swear word in the Arkhangelsk region. As late as 1920, people of that region used legends of the Chuds to scare small naughty children.

title: Chud


text:
AKDN

AKDN may refer to:
 * Acadiana Railway, a short line railroad based in Opelousas, Louisiana, United States
 * Aga Khan Development Network, a multinational network of development agencies for humanity

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

title: AKDN


text:
Talk:Albert Belle

Redirect
I have redirected the Joey Belle page to here. Sensation002 16:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cork
From the 1994 Bat Burglary page:

 * Omar Vizquel, a member of the Indians in 1994, wrote this in his 2003 autobiography: "I can be naive at times, but I'm not stupid. Certainly not stupid enough to steal Albert's corked bat and replace it with one that looked completely different -- one that was autographed by Paul Sorrento. That wasn't even a nice try. The problem, of course, was that all of Albert's bats were corked." [2]

Perhaps this first-hand information could temper the otherwise effusive main page. Thoughts? 128.103.14.62 01:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Image
I realize that Belle has/had a bad reputation, but I believe it shows a little bias on this page to use a police mugshot for his image. I'll look for a new photo unless there are objections.
 * No objection here. I was hoping we could see a pic of him playing ball rather than his mugshot (which was taken, to be fair, five years after he stopped playing).The Invisible Man 19:59, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Durwood Merrill
Shouldn't the line about him calling him Joey be moved to controversy? It seems out of place where it is now --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 15:17, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Fielding
I understand the need for objectivity, but I don't see how saying Albert Belle was an average fielder is more objective than saying he was very good. All defensive metric evidence would support that he was definitely an above-average fielder. I would think either there should be support for the statement, it should be further expanded upon, it should reflect the most accurate statement, or it should be eliminated entirely. 71.115.236.84 (talk) 03:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

OR
The glowing comparisons of Belle to Mo Vaughn and surrounding material shows strong signs of original research. If someone doesn't document it, it ought to go. No doubt he was a great player. A few more years at his career tempo, would have produced Hall of Fame credentials. Tapered (talk) 07:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

dWAR
Last year I added some Sabermetric data to counter the glowing description of Belle's throwing arm with the brutal facts—he was an sub-par defensive player. The category is "Defensive Wins Above Replacement." Unfortunately, there's no article for that metric, only for Wins Above Replacement. I put a d before the "WAR" link, and someone removed it, with some justification. I've now put an italicized "defensive" before the link. Anyone who follows up on the reference can find dWAR on that page, with Belle's awful numbers. I don't know how offensive and defensive WAR are integrated to arrive @ WAR, but Belle's defense sabotaged his total metric. Tapered (talk) 06:17, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Restoration
Any reason not to restore this information that an IP deleted in 2012? Subject to fixing up the references, of course.

 * In February 2006, Belle was arrested on suspicion of stalking a woman who was identified in court as a former licensed escort. He was again arrested in charges related to the same case on May 17, 2006. On July 27, 2006, Belle pleaded guilty to one count of stalking and he was sentenced on August 24 to 90 days in jail and five years supervised probation. Belle had attached a GPS tracking device onto her car and obtained her phone records. Belle issued an apology to the woman stating, "I have made mistakes in my life, but I have admitted my mistakes and learned from them to be a better person."

-- Pemilligan (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Albert Belle


text:
Polar night

Polar night is a phenomenon in the northernmost and southernmost regions of Earth where night lasts for more than 24 hours. This occurs only inside the polar circles. The opposite phenomenon, polar day, or midnight sun, occurs when the Sun remains above the horizon for more than 24 hours.

"Night" is understood as the center of the Sun being below a free horizon. Since the atmosphere refracts sunlight, polar day is longer than polar night, and the area that is affected by polar night is somewhat smaller than the area of midnight sun. The polar circle is located at a latitude between these two areas, at approximately 66.5°. While it is day in the Arctic Circle, it is night in the Antarctic Circle, and vice versa.

Any planet or moon with a sufficient axial tilt that rotates with respect to its star significantly more frequently than it orbits the star (and with no tidal locking between the two) will experience the same phenomenon (a nighttime lasting more than one rotation period).

Description
The length of polar night varies by latitude, from 24 hours just inside the polar circles to 179 days at the poles. As mentioned, a location experiencing polar night does not mean that the location will be in full darkness; in many cases, due to sunlight being refracted over the horizon, a location experiencing polar night may be in one of the various phases of polar twilight. As in locations experiencing daytime, the middle of the day will typically be the brightest time in locations experiencing polar twilight.

For example, a typical day during polar night in Vadsø, Norway will begin with astronomical night, astronomical twilight, nautical twilight, and civil twilight in that order (with each successive phase including more light than the last). Following civil twilight, the day will progress through the other phases in the opposite order (nautical twilight, then astronomical twilight, then astronomical night to end the day).

Types of polar night
As there are various kinds of twilight, there also exist various kinds of polar night. Each kind of polar night is defined as when it is darker than the corresponding kind of twilight. The descriptions below are based on relatively clear skies, so the sky will be darker in the presence of dense clouds.

Polar twilight
Polar twilight occurs in areas that are located at the inner border of the polar circles, where the Sun will be on or below the horizon all day on the winter solstice. There is then no true daylight at the solar culmination, only civil twilight. This means that the Sun is below the horizon, but by less than 6°. During civil twilight, there may still be enough light for most normal outdoor activities because of light scattering by the upper atmosphere and refraction. Street lamps may remain on and a person looking at a window from within a brightly lit room may see their reflection even at noon, as the level of outdoor illuminance will be below that of many illuminated indoor spaces. It occurs at latitudes between about 67°24' and 72°34' North or South, when the Sun does not rise, only civil twilight visible.

Northern Hemisphere:

 * 68° North: December 9 to January 2
 * 69° North: December 1 to January 10
 * 70° North: November 26 to January 16
 * 71° North: November 21 to January 21
 * 72° North: November 16 to January 25

Southern Hemisphere:

 * 68° South: June 7 to July 3
 * 69° South: May 30 to July 11
 * 70° South: May 24 to July 18
 * 71° South: May 19 to July 23
 * 72° South: May 14 to July 27

Sufferers of seasonal affective disorder tend to seek out therapy with artificial light, as the psychological benefits of daylight require relatively high levels of ambient light (up to 10,000 lux) which are not present in any stage of twilight; thus, the midday twilights experienced anywhere inside the polar circles are still "polar night" for this purpose.

Civil polar night
The civil polar night period produces only a faint glow of light visible at midday. It happens when there is no civil twilight and only nautical twilight occurs at the solar culmination. Civil twilight happens when the Sun is between 0 and 6° below the horizon, and civil night when it is lower than that. Therefore, the civil polar night is limited to latitudes above roughly 72° 34', which is exactly 6° inside the polar circle. Nowhere on mainland Europe is this definition met. On the Norwegian territory of Svalbard, however, civil polar night lasts from about 11 November until 30 January. Dikson, in Russia, experiences civil polar night from December 6 to January 6. During dense cloud cover places like the coast of Finnmark (about 70°) in Norway will get a darker "day". On the Canadian territory of Pond Inlet, Nunavut, however, civil polar night lasts from about 16 December until 26 December.

Nautical polar night
During the nautical polar night period, there is no trace of daylight, except around midday. It happens when there is no nautical twilight and only astronomical twilight occurs at the solar culmination. Nautical twilight happens when the Sun is between six and twelve degrees below the horizon. There is a location at the horizon around midday with more light than others because of refraction. During nautical night, the Sun is lower than 12° below the horizon, so nautical polar night is limited to latitudes above roughly 78° 34', which is exactly 12° within the polar circle, or approximately 11.5° from the pole.

The Norwegian territory of Svalbard Ny-Ålesund experiences this from December 12 to 30. Its antipode (-78.91667°N, -168.06667°W) experiences this from June 12 to July 1.

The Canadian territory of Eureka, Nunavut, experiences this from December 2 to January 8. Its antipode (-79.98333°N, 94.06667°W) experiences this from June 1 to July 11.

The Russian territory of Franz Josef Land experiences this from November 27 to January 15. Its antipode (-81°N, -125°W) experiences this from May 25 to July 17.

Alert, Nunavut, the northernmost settlement in Canada and the world, experiences this from November 19 to January 22. Its antipode (-82.5°N, 117.63333°W) experiences this from May 19 to July 25.

Oodaaq, a gravel bank at the northern tip of Greenland and a disputed northernmost point of land, experiences this from November 15 to January 27. Its antipode (-83.66667°N, 150.11667°W) experiences this from May 13 to July 31.

Astronomical polar night
The astronomical polar night is a period of continuous night where no astronomical twilight occurs. Astronomical twilight happens when the Sun is between twelve and eighteen degrees below the horizon and astronomical night when it is lower than that. Thus, the astronomical polar night is limited to latitudes above roughly 84° 34', which is exactly 18° within the polar circle, or approximately five and a half degrees from the pole. The only permanent settlement on Earth above this latitude is Amundsen–Scott South Pole Station, the South Pole scientific research station, whose winter personnel are completely isolated from mid-February to late October. During the astronomical polar night, stars of the sixth magnitude, which are the dimmest stars visible to the naked eye, will be visible throughout the entire day. This happens when the sun is between exactly 18° and approximately 23° 26' below the horizon. These conditions last about 11 weeks at the poles.

South Pole, Antarctica experiences this from May 11 to August 1.

The North Pole experiences this from November 12 to January 28.

Polar Sun cycle
If an observer located on either the North Pole or the South Pole were to define a "day" as the time from the maximal elevation of the Sun above the horizon during one period of daylight, until the maximal elevation of the Sun above the horizon of the next period of daylight, then a "polar day" as experienced by such an observer would be one Earth-year long.

Effects on sleep and mental health
Numerous analyses have been conducted to examine the effects of polar night on humans. In Tromsø, Norway, a city located at 69 degrees north, there is a 2 month long polar night, lasting from mid-November to mid-January. An analysis was conducted based on 2015-16 data from a health survey that involved residents of the region over age 40, with the goal being to analyze the seasonal variation of sleeping patterns in Tromsø. The study found that there was a higher prevalence of insomnia among men in the fall and winter months, but not among women. However, overall, sleep duration varied little to none throughout the year despite the extreme changes in daylight; it is worthwhile to note that a factor in this result may be the significant amount of artificial light in Tromsø.

A similar study was conducted among men who overwintered at Belgrano II, an Argentine research station in Antarctica. The station is located at 77 degrees south, resulting in a polar night 4 months in length. The study was conducted across 5 different winter campaigns in the 2010s, bringing in a total of 82 participants. The study found that participants generally slept for longer periods of time in the summer months than the winter months. Additionally, greater amounts of social jetlag were observed in the winter months.

A third study aimed to examine the mental health of 88 Korean crew members at two different research stations in Antarctica, King Sejong Station and Jang Bogo Station. No crew members had been diagnosed with a mental illness prior to the study. While in Antarctica, 7 of the 88 crew members were diagnosed with a mental illness during early winter. The mental illnesses included insomnia disorder (3 diagnosed), depressive disorder (1 diagnosed), adjustment disorder (2 diagnosed), and alcohol use disorder (1 diagnosed).

Overall, both Antarctic studies showed a lower amount of sleep beginning at the start of winter, while the study from the Korean bases also showed an onset of mental health problems at that time. While the study from Tromsø did not show a similar drop in sleep duration as the Antarctic studies (perhaps due to the high amounts of artificial light), it did show an increased amount of insomnia in men during winter; therefore, the polar night was shown to have sleep and/or mental health effects in all three studies.

title: Polar night


text: Category:Swiss cartoonists

title: Category:Swiss cartoonists


text: Category:Swiss novelists

title: Category:Swiss novelists


text: Category:Swiss writers

title: Category:Swiss writers


text:
File:1958 Football World Cup poster.jpg

Summary
1958 Football World Cup poster

"Sweden" written in French, English, Spanish, German.

"Football" written in English/French, Spanish, German.

title: File:1958 Football World Cup poster.jpg


text:
Valéry Mézague

Valéry Mézague (8 December 1983 – 15 November 2014) was a Cameroonian professional footballer who played as a midfielder.

Mézague was born in the 5th arrondissement of Marseille in 1983, to a Cameroonian mother. He acquired French nationality on 16 September 1997, through the collective effect of his mother's naturalization.

He represented Cameroon at international level. His most notable moment with the Lions Indomptables was at the 2003 FIFA Confederations Cup, where he became the starter central midfielder in the lost final against host France, after replacing the late Marc-Vivien Foé during the victorious semi final versus Colombia.

In 2003, he was involved in a serious car crash which ruled him out of the game for four months. Despite this, he fought back to reclaim his form and his performances attracted the attention of Harry Redknapp, with Mézague joining Portsmouth F.C. on loan for the 2004–05 season. However, he failed to make any sort of substantial impression and returned to France in June 2005, where he followed his former manager at Portsmouth Alain Perrin to FC Sochaux-Montbéliard.

His younger brother, Teddy, is also a footballer.

He was found dead in his apartment on 15 November 2014, due to a cardiac arrest caused by a heart disease.

title: Valéry Mézague


text:
File:1962 Football World Cup poster.jpg

1962 Football World Cup poster

title: File:1962 Football World Cup poster.jpg


text:
Talk:Abu Ghraib torture and prisoner abuse/Archive 1

The apology issue
Cut from article:

 * Bush ... however did not say he was sorry nor offered an apology.

This statement assumes that he ought to apologize, which is a point of view held by many. It would be more encyclopedic to identify which advocates hold this point of view. Is it human rights advocates generally? Or opponents of the US-led invasion? Or domestic political opponents (i.e., Democrats)?

Something like:
 * John Kerry and other prominent Democrats blamed Bush and Rumsfeld for the abuses, asserting that "the highest authorities" could have stopped the torture if they wanted to, but that they clearly either did not care or actively promoted it. (sample only, don't paste this in that article!!); or,
 * Several US reporters, Mr. X, Ms. Y, and Mr. Z (who had earlier tried to get Bush to apologize for 9/11) also tried to get Bush to apologize for the prisoner abues.

On the other hand, didn't I read something recently about how Bush and/or Rumsfeld DID apologize several times for the recent prisoner abuse? Help me out, someone. This event is unfolding faster than I can keep track of it. --Uncle Ed 18:31, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Bush apologized to the King of Jordan for the abuse photos last week . I'm not sure why the King of Jordan was specifically chosen to receive the apology, other than that he happened to be around for an official visit, but I'm no foreign policy expert. Saucepan 18:46, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I think the point was that if things have gone so babdly Bush goes on "Arab" TV to try to gain hearts and minds, to give a PR mea maxima culpa, a literal mea maxima culpa is par for the course. But it didn't happen, and the Whitehouse acknowledged that, claiming it was enough so many had done it in his stead. By the time the flamingly obvious dawned upon them, that it was NOT enough, it was far too late (IMO). 142.177.21.215 20:16, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

Almost cardiac arrest
The article quotes someone as saying that a prisoner was hit so hard in the chest that he almost went into cardiac arrest... is that a meaningful statement, medically? Is there a state akin to "almost cardiac arrest"? Some specific rhythm or something? --Dante Alighieri | Talk 20:24, May 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * I agree. People "almost go into cardiac arrest" when they drink copious amounts of Red Bull. It's not a good way of phrasing it. - Mark 15:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

§ It has recently been discovered that a blow to the chest, and not necessarily a very hard one, can cause death by interfering with the heart's own "pacemaker" at just the right instant in its sequence of actions. This discovery was reported in, among other praces, Science News about a year ago. So it is possible that somebody suffered a temporary heart stoppage and the heart had to be restarted. P0M

 * I am aware of the phenomenon, note that I did not question the possibility of a blow to the chest leading to cardiac arrest. However, if the prisoner's heart stopped, I'd call that being IN cardiac arrest, not ALMOST being in cardiac arrest, so I'm not sure that this condition is relevant. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 16:50, May 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * I think you are referring to commotio cordis / myocardial contusion which we should have an article on if we haven't got one already. -- The Anome 15:08, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

§ I would not expect medical precision from whatever combination of observers and reporters contributed the information to the original report. I was just suggesting that it's more likely that language was imprecise than that the report is fundamentally wrong. There's no way to tell for sure without going to a more fundamental level, the level of competent medical personnel who may have been on the scene. P0M 21:55, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

§ Just checked. The info comes from Hersh's article and reports the words of the whistle-blower, Specialist Joseph M. Darby, an M.P. Who knows what his level of medical expertise may be. P0M 22:25, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Do the US soldiers' actions constitute torture?
Most of this section is spent providing analysis as to what looks or doesn't look like torture. Like a high school research report. The analysis of the author should be removed and replaced by factual reporting. i.e. these statements & conclusions should be attributed to somebody besides the Wiki author or they should be removed. Mdchachi|Talk 19:20, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The author does give a partiuclar definition of torture at the beginning of the section, so I don't think it's that much of a problem. It would be good to cite the POV's of some authoritative sources on what the treatment of the prisioners constituted, though. Cadr
 * The International Committee of the Red Cross said that the abuse was "in some cases tantamount to torture." Dpbsmith 20:54, 13 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The Pentagon just admitted that the acts violated the Geneva Convention, so that's something. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 09:20, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

Is the word "scandal" NPOV?
Oh, all right, it's a rhetorical question...

The U. S. press is now generally using the word "scandal" to describe the prison abuse incidents. However, the definition of "scandal" (AHD4) is:

 * 1. A publicized incident that brings about disgrace or offends the moral sensibilities of society: a drug scandal that forced the mayor's resignation. 2. A person, thing, or circumstance that causes or ought to cause disgrace or outrage: a politician whose dishonesty is a scandal; considered the housing shortage a scandal. 3. Damage to reputation or character caused by public disclosure of immoral or grossly improper behavior; disgrace. 4. Talk that is damaging to one's character; malicious gossip.

That is, "scandal" concentrates attention on the disgrace of the person engaging in the scandalous behavior, and is usually used in the context of sexual misconduct (Senator Wilbur Mills caught with a stripper in the Tidal Basin; Bill Clinton not having sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky), bribery (Albert Fall taking bribes to give Harding's cronies Teapot Dome leases), etc. It seems to me that "scandal" trivializes the offense and concentrate attention on it as an embarrassment to the United States, rather than as a crime committed against the victims.

We certainly would not talk of the "Black Hole of Calcutta scandal" or the "Auschwitz scandal" or even the "Japanese-American internment camp scandal" (Abu Ghraib not being comparable to the first two examples, but perhaps to the third—particularly if the Red Cross estimate that 70-90% of the prisoners were innocent civilians is correct.) Dpbsmith 20:50, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

 * That's an interesting point you're making. So what do you suggest as an alternative?  User:Palefire

 * Good question. My main concern, stated above, is I do not like the implication that the significant fact is the embarrassment to the United States (or that, as seemingly implied in some press accounts, the issue is somehow about the pictures themselves, rather with the abuse of which the pictures are evidence). My thoughts for a title would be:

 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse in 2003
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse incidents
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse incidents in 2003
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse during 2003 U.S-led occupation
 * Abuse of Iraqi prisoners in U. S. custody at Abu Ghraib, 2003

 * The existing title is so long that nobody is going to find it by typing it in precisely. It will be found either by search or by linking from the article on Abu Ghraib. Therefore it isn't essential that the article title begin with Abu Ghraib, or that it mirror press usage. Therefore it can be as accurate and NPOV as we can make it. Along these lines, I think the word "abuse" is NPOV since this characterization has been acknowledged by U. S. officials. I think it's appropriate for the title to be limited to Abu Ghraib, since it is very clear that such abuses did occur there, while allegations of abuse elsewhere or that it is part of a large-scale pattern of abuse are debatable.

 * Of the bunch I just listed, I prefer "Abuse of Iraqi prisoners in U. S. custody at Abu Ghraib, 2003". If the title should begin with "Abu Ghraib," then "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse during 2003 U.S-led occupation" would be my second choice. Both of these titles imply that U. S. involvement is an intrinsically important part of the matter, which I think is neutral and accurate. Dpbsmith 12:46, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Of course, we could also have:
 * Abuse of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces at Abu Ghraib, 2003
 * mirroring a subhead in the article, and, of course, references to "2003" should perhaps be "2003-2004." Dpbsmith 12:53, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * It is better to keep article names short. There was a similar issue in "Oil for Food" when a separate article was set up for the "Oil for Food Scandal." Even though that seems more like a "scandal" in the traditional usage (i.e., secret kickbacks, allegations of people up and down the chain getting greased) this was objected to, as none of the allegations have been adjudicated as yet. So "Oil for Food Allegations" was used, and eventually this was merged into the large "Oil for Food" article. Now, despite the pictures, most of the article (that is, the written specifics) are, as of now, allegations, in the same sense as the UN Food thing. I suggest:
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse allegations
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse investigation
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse charges
 * Any of these would be fine by me. Dpbsmith 15:27, 14 May 2004 (UTC)
 * In any case, I think "scandal" is too loaded a word to attach to any article, as it is POV and telegraphs an allegation of truth. -- Cecropia | Talk 13:16, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The term itself is perfectly neutral. It describes the public perception of an event, not its truthfulness. As our own article scandal states, "a scandal involves widely publicized allegations of wrong-doing, disgrace or moral outrage. A scandal may be based on reality, or the product of false allegations."--Eloquence* 14:23, May 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * Just for comparison, these article titles use the word scandal: Harken Energy Scandal, Mutual fund scandal (2003), Yazoo land scandal, Crédit Mobilier of America scandal, Teapot Dome scandal, Whitewater scandal, Sharpstown scandal, Liberal Party of Canada sponsorship scandal, Pacific scandal, Spiegel scandal, Watergate scandal, Black Sox scandal, Olympic Games scandals........whatever we call it, please don't let it be Abu Ghraibgate. Kingturtle 14:31, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * NOOOOOOOO! No anythinggate. Some cliches deserve to die. But I notice something interesting in your list. Some "scandals" have come down to us as being called "Scandal": notably Whitewater, Watergate (is that now "Watergatagate" :), Black Sox, Teapot Dome) as that is how they have come to be known in history. But we don't take about other debacles which could as easily be described as "scandals": Iran-Contra (Affair), Bay of Pigs (Invasion), Profumo (Affair), Oil for Food (Allegations), Dreyfus (Affair). So "scandal" isn't quite NPOV. -- Cecropia | Talk 15:05, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Touching on earlier points: I would think that "scandal" does not imply truth. As I said, it implies embarrassment of the persons of whom the scandal is reported. Someone could be embarrassed or disgraced by a false report as well as a true one. But—in deciding on a title for the article: is there any question about the truth of abuse at Abu Ghraib? Any title carries some implication on the truth of the abuses. I'm not going to quibble over erring on the side of caution/weaseling by using a phrase like "allegations/investigations/charges." But as far as I know (and unlike the alleged photos of supposed abuses by British troops) nobody is suggesting the photos were faked. I believe U. S. officials have acknowledged that the incidents occurred--Bush gave an apology of a sort for them--and that the incidents constituted abuse.

 * Anyway, I think your and Kingturtles observations of the use of the word supports my view. Abu Ghraid is not comparable from other things called "scandals", and the things that are comparable to it are not called "scandals." Dpbsmith 15:27, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think anyone is arguing the photos were faked. But there are a lot of charges in the article (text) that are not depicted in the photos. -- Cecropia | Talk 16:26, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I notice that Slate is now referring to the issue as "Interro-Gate". Just thought you'd like to know. Saucepan 22:51, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you for ruining my whole day. Please excuse me, I must go vomit. Dpbsmith 00:26, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

SUMMARY of discussion above re "scandal"

 * Mild consensus that the word "scandal" does in fact present POV problems, because
 * The word "scandal" is traditionally used for less serious situations, as in the article Scandal
 * The word "scandal" is not traditionally used in situations of comparable seriousness
 * Some think the word "scandal" implies that the allegations are true. Those that think that are probably mistaken, but even so it is a reason to avoid the word.

as a title for the article.
 * No yet-articulated objections to:
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse allegations
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse investigation
 * Abu Ghraib prison abuse charges

Unfortunately (arguing against myself here)
 * "Scandal" seems to be the word the U. S. press is settling on for headlines, etc.

 * Is this correct? Dpbsmith 18:38, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The Village Voice flirted with "Torturegate" but now, apparently having heeded Dpbsmith's anti-"gate" plea, is using "Torture Scandal" as a generic subject area. I agree that "scandal" seems to be coming into the most common use. JamesMLane 13:06, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

Propose move from "Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal" to "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports"
If there is no further discussion, in about a day I'm going to move the article to:
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports

I know this isn't exactly the same as any titles that have been mentioned above. My rationale for this one:
 * Avoids the word scandal (my concern)
 * Keeps the title short—same number of words as before
 * Continues to have the title begin with "Abu Ghraib"
 * prison->prisoner puts the focus on who was abused rather than where the abuse occurred

For the use of "reports"
 * objective (since abuse was reported—by Taguba, by the ICRC, by Sixty Minutes, and subsequently by the press in general).
 * Doesn't state unequivocally that all the abuse (and other items) mentioned in the article necessarily occurred as reported; leaves open the possibility that some of the reports could be inaccurate
 * But does lean toward the likelihood that abuse really did occur, while "investigation," "charges," and "allegations" seem to me to lean too far in the direction of questioning the basic credibility of events which U. S. officials pretty much acknowledge.

Please do not use "reports". That word has connotations too. It implies that they may not have occurred at all! "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse" is factual. Paul Beardsell 22:39, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I completely understand (and agree with) your concern. But see discussion above. I used "reports" because I thought it was stronger than "allegations," "charges," or "investigation." In choosing "reports," I was, I think, responding to some of Cecropia's concerns. I don't think we can be sure that absolutely everything reported is going to turn out to be factual. For example, it appears as if there were some faked photos of British abuse of Iraqi prisoners. I felt comfortable with "reports," because I don't think any of us really know for sure just what happened in Abu Ghraib, but we do know for sure what the ICRC, Taguba, Seymour Hersh, etc. reported.

 * Anyway, I've already moved it.

 * I'm sure you're aware that you or any other editor could move it to some other title, but I strongly advise discussing it carefully here first!

 * Got any specific suggestions for a better title? Dpbsmith 00:32, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

more reports
Maybe some of this can be included: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/DD73BD0B-70D0-4AAE-81AA-D19914E4219D.htm. Kingturtle 04:53, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Observed vs. assumed
I changed the wording of the prisoner being sat on. First, "torture" is an evaluation. Second, we don't know whether the prisoner in the picture is a POW, a detainee for questioning, or what. POW has legal meaning.

However, we need to let the pictures speak for themselves where we don't have separate documentation or testimony. The thing I find especially perverse is that most of these pictures are clearly not documenting actual torture (i.e., the process of inflicting extreme pain or coersion to punish or elicit information) but are staged. I can understand (not approve) why people torture other people; I can't understand the mind that stages these scenes for "what I did on summer vacation-type pictures." In the particular picture, it is obvious the sergeant is sitting on the prisoner, and a good assumption it is for the picture-taking. Anyone who has gone through military training endures lots worse than that. But how did the Sgt. get the prisoner to that? Some good guesses: "Do this or I'll beat you," "Do this or I'll shoot you," "Play along with this and you'll get extra rations." Point is, let's not "gild the lily," let the pictures speak for themselves, absent verifiable information. -- Cecropia | Talk 17:49, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Not that I'm condoning it, but the pictures were likely not staged for "summer vacation" photos, but for psyops. The psychological stress that being forced to submit to such humiliations, and subsequently view photographs of them, is likely to have induced in the captives may have made them more valuable intelligence assets. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 19:33, May 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * And not that I'm contradicting you, but... the reported motion picture documentation of amours between Miss England and her boyfriend/fiance/whatEVER... what were those? Psyops? Blackmail material? "Animal House" hi-jinks? I can't really imagine military intelligence instructing them to do that, or even hinting at it. So if that was just good-natured high-spirits or something, is it conceivable that some of the other pictures could have had an element of the same thing? Who knows? Thankfully, not I. Dpbsmith 21:05, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * not staged for "summer vacation" photos -- evidently you think Psyops is a lot more clever than I do. If they were staged for Psyops, why were the participants under investigation for courts-martial before this got out to the Press? -- Cecropia | Talk 21:39, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

More serious than 9/11
I won't remove this comment:
 * "The torture? A more serious blow to the United States than September 11 (attacks). Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by Americans against themselves."-- Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, foreign minister of The Vatican.

because it is a direct quote. But I don't appreciate Archibishop Lajolo gratititous observation. If the Vatican were hit by a 9/11 type attack and I (or anyone in the west) were to say, about the major US scandal of priests molesting children:
 * "The abuse? A more serious blow to the Vatican than than the terror attack. Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by the Catholic priesthood itself"

I would probably be roundly condemned both as an anti-Catholic bigot and a person with no sense of proportion. -- Cecropia | Talk 18:03, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * You are misreading the quote. What Lajolo is saying is that 9/11 (terrible as it was) increased international sympathy for the US. Nations around the world were easily swayed to participate in U.S. responses to 9/11. Whereas, the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse case severely undermines the credibility of the U.S. It is a more serious blow because it damages the ability of the U.S. to garner support. Kingturtle 19:36, 16 May 2004 (UTC)
 * How did you come up with that evaluation? I don't see any expression of sympathy for the US (9/11 or otherwise). Here is more from the AP:
 * ROME (AP) ? The scandal of prisoner abuses by U.S. soldiers in Iraq has dealt a bigger blow to the United States than the Sept. 11 attacks, the Vatican foreign minister told an Italian newspaper.
 * In an interview published Wednesday in the Rome daily La Repubblica, Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo described the abuses as "a tragic episode in the relationship with Islam" and said the scandal would fuel hatred for the West and for Christianity.
 * "The torture? A more serious blow to the United States than Sept. 11. Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by Americans against themselves," Lajolo was quoted as saying in La Repubblica.
 * Lajolo said that "intelligent people in Arab countries understand that in a democracy such episodes are not hidden and are punished ... Still the vast mass of people ? under the influence of Arab media ? cannot but feel aversion and hate for the West growing inside themselves."
 * And, he added, "the West is often identified with Christianity."
 * What I read there is concern that he fears Muslims will associate Christianity with the abuses and anger them toward the Church. I see a lot of concern for Muslim public opinion and not a bit over 9/11. -- Cecropia | Talk 21:37, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * You overstate your case a touch, Cecropia. Of course the killing of 3500 innocents in NY was despicable, terrible.  More thousands (most of them innocents) have died in Afghanistan and in Iraq.  All civilised people must regret that too.  Barbaric acts were once seen to be committed by Afghanis and Iraqis exclusively, but we now know that this isn't true.  What is the exchange rate?  How many Afghan/Iraqi innocents are worth one American?  Killing them or torturing them.  Why is it somehow allowable when it is in retaliation/revenge?  Remember that the enemy also justified 9/11 (however wrongly) as retaliation/revenge.  The damage the Church refers to is that many people never used to consider the USA capable of barbarism and now they do.  The USA always were the good guys in most Western eyes.  That is the damage the USA has done to itself.  Paul Beardsell 22:08, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * The Archbishop was comparing 9/11 to prisoner abuse. Period. He didn't refer to damage done to US standing in the eyes of the West. He referred to the Catholic Church's and Christianity's standing in the Muslim world. -- Cecropia | Talk 22:17, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

 * That is not how I read "The torture? A more serious blow to the United States than September 11 (attacks). Except that the blow was not inflicted by terrorists but by Americans against themselves."-- Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, foreign minister of The Vatican. Paul Beardsell 14:12, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree with Cecropia that the quote should stay in. As far as I can tell, no one has disagreed.  Given that consensus, we don't really need to debate on this page whether the quote is a brilliant insight, a slight exaggeration, or one of the Top Ten Stupidest Remarks of 2004.  (No, I'm not proposing that as a new article.)  As for the other POV, my guess is that quite a few American and pro-American officials privately agree with Cecropia.  They may hesitate to say so publicly, though, because they don't want to seem to defend the abuse and because they don't want to criticize an Archbishop.  If anyone notable does take him on, that quote should also be included. JamesMLane 00:40, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Could somebody please add Copper Green to the box at the bottem? -- MINAC! PS: Id like to make a Abu Ghraib scandal, chain of command page. This should work.

Poll on page title
I find the current page title "prisoner abuse reports" POV, because much of the abuse has been acknowledged as factual, including confessions by the perpetrators, and the photographic evidence is very strong. Nobody, to my knowledge, has alleged that the photos from Abu Ghraib were forged (as opposed to the British abuse photos).

Since page titles are so subjective, I think it's a good idea to poll on what the page title should be. Before the poll can start, however, we should collect all reasonable options. As a tentative deadline for doing so I suggest Sunday, May 23.--Eloquence*

 * Indeed, "much of the abuse has been acknowledged as factual." For the record: Rumsfeld's apology. "there has been a good deal of discussion about who bears responsibility terrible activities that took place at Abu Ghraib.... They were in U.S. custody. Our country had an obligation to treat them right. We didn't, and that was wrong... So to those Iraqis who were mistreated by members of the U.S. armed forces, I offer my deepest apology... I'm seeking a way to provide appropriate compensation to those detainees who suffered such grievous and brutal abuse and cruelty at the hands of a few members of the United States armed forces." So: I'd say that in evaluating page titles, we should all agree that the page title should not imply doubt that many serious abuses occurred. Dpbsmith 13:44, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Feel free to add your suggestions below.
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal
 * See discussion above on the word "scandal".
 * 1. Scandal. Wikipedia lists Watergate Scandal, Lewinsky scandal, Whitewater Scandal, Harken Energy Scandal, Quiz show scandals, Olympic Games scandals, Mutual fund scandal (2003), Accounting scandals of 2002, Teapot Dome Scandal, Black Sox Scandal, and literally dozens more. There's never been a problem with the word until this article. The Wikipedia article scandal begins: "A scandal involves widely publicized allegations of wrong-doing, disgrace or moral outrage. A scandal may be based on reality, or the product of false allegations." This doesn't sound npov to me. Would you want to change the above to "Teapot Dome Corruption Reports", "Lewinsky Sex Reports", "Blacksox Gambling Reports", etc.? How about "Reports of 9/11 attacks"? The abuse of prisoners is not contested; one abuser just pled guilty. In my opinion, either the word "scandal" should be removed from all wikipedia articles, or it should stay here, since this is clearly as much of a scandal as the others listed above. And removing the word "scandal" throughout wikipedia is a matter for the Village Pump or a wikipedia-wide vote. Quadell 13:42, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

 * Just to be perfectly clear... my objection to the word "scandal" is that what happened at Abu Ghraib is far beyond scandalous. Dpbsmith 16:18, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm taking the liberty of quoting something {User:Quadell:Quadell] said on my talk page, as I think it very nicely illuminates one of the questions at issue. He said (lightly edited):

 * To me, a scandal occurs when a people become are upset about an embarrassing controversy. In my view, the My Lai atrocity came first, then the cover-up, and then, when the story broke, there was a scandal. In the Lewinsky affair, there was a scandal but no atrocity. The Russian rape of Berlin was something akin to an atrocity without a scandal.

 * (I don't agree, of course, because I still don't believe revelations of atrocities are or should be called scandals. But I see his point. A clear and logical point of view which I don't think matches the way the words are really used. Dpbsmith 19:40, 19 May 2004 (UTC))

 * 2. Dpbsmith invited me to comment here as I had weighed in on the general question about whether scandal is inherently POV and to be avoided as asked at the pump. I said no its not. I think this option is the most acceptable, despite all the talk above, because that it is what others are calling it (e.g. 220,000 Google hits for "abu ghraib" scandal), and it isn't up to Wikipedia to either play up or play down the event, that wouldn't be neutral. However, in the spirit of compromise, I will also support Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse given below. I think the current title "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports" is unacceptable as it plays down the event too much, and is thus not neutral. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 08:37, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse
 * 1) I'd actually prefer this to Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports if we could get consensus on it. Dpbsmith 16:18, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) This is neutral to a fault: Anybody would think the prisoners' breakfast was late.  Nevertheless, it has my vote.  Paul Beardsell 21:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) I agree that the word reports has a connotation of not being certified and is therefore misleading. Regarding the argument that not all reports were certified, if this was a reason for adding reports to the title a great many articles needed reports in the title. It is sufficient to specify in the article which reports were certified and which were not. The fact that abuses happened in the prison is beyond question. Get-back-world-respect 21:53, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
 * This is the title with currently most votes in the poll for the article's title. Get-back-world-respect 22:07, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

Reports (well, of course, it was my own suggestion). My personal opinion is that it would be deeply offensive to imply that abuse did not occur, when U. S. authorities have acknowledged it. However, having just the tiniest bit of wiggle room in the title made me feel more comfortable about adding a paragraph about Hersh's article in The New Yorker to the section entitled "Isolated incident, or systematic failure, or official policy?" I regard Hersh's article as a credible "report." But DoD Spokesperson Mr. Lawrence DiRita... well, we could have a debate on whether or not the DoD "denied" it. If we restricted the page to facts that were proven beyond a reasonable Wikipedian doubt, I think the entire "Isolated incident, or systematic failure, or official policy?" section could be questioned... and I think that section is very important.
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse in 2003
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse incidents
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse incidents in 2003
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse during 2003 U.S-led occupation
 * Abuse of Iraqi prisoners in U. S. custody at Abu Ghraib, 2003
 * Abuse of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces
 * Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports
 * 1) Reports. "Reports" may not be punchy enough for some, but the term in not POV. "Reports" does not comment on truth, and much more detail is alleged than is seen in the pictures alone, such as who, what, why and motive. -- Cecropia | Talk 01:14, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Hersh's article might not be quite so reliable. NPR Morning Edition had a piece (May 18) in which they were saying that he's done some brilliant work but his blunt political perspective and public history make some of his material problematic. -- Cecropia | Talk 13:24, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Well, I think that's my point. Given that DoD has non-denial-denied Hersh's report (Newsweek has a very similar, independent story BTW) you can't label it as unquestionably factual. Either the article includes relevant, important emerging reports whose truth is open to discussion, or you restrict the article to the photographs and not much more. I don't think you can say anything in the article about involvement by higher-ups without getting into iffy territory. A year from now maybe Hersh's report may be seen as yet another inaccurate-news-story scandal. I have to say that I personally parse the DoD statement as "Hersh's story is broadly correct but shouldn't have been published because it was based on lucky guesswork. "
 * My "spin" watching suspects the Hersh's report is deeply flawed because several official sources have been ridiculing it. Usually they don't rise to ridicule (as opposed to weasel-word denial) unless they feel fairly confident. -- Cecropia | Talk 20:10, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * The Bush administration might be glad to hear that at least one individual still trusts them, Cecropia. Get-back-world-respect 21:54, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

 * What do you think of "The Roots of Torture", a Newsweek report? (Not a rhetorical question). Dpbsmith 20:32, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * About as POV as you can get, begging the question of "torture" and assigning it cosmic meaning at the same time. (Not a rhetorical answer). -- Cecropia | Talk 21:37, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

 * As for the others: I object to "scandal" for reasons articulated above. I wouldn't really object to "Abuse of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces" but it does have the following problems: a) it doesn't even include the name "Abu Ghraib;" b) Whodunnit? Was it "coalition forces?" Surely it was only the U.S. at Abu Ghraib Alleged abuses by British soldiers elsewhere are not quite as solidly established, in my mind (it's acknowledged that some photos were faked, isn't it?) And do U. S. civilians in the employ of defense contractors count as "coalition forces?"

 * Dpbsmith 13:44, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

Comments

 * I added a query at the Village Pump regarding the use of the word "Scandal" in article titles in general. I thought you might be interested. Quadell 14:04, May 19, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, so far, there hasn't been a whole lot of consensus. I guess I'd be okay with any of the options. (All should be rds to the current selection though.) Quadell (talk) 18:34, May 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * On the face of it, I'd say that not very many people seem to be very concerned about it. I asked JamesMLane, who commented above that the press seems to be calling it "Scandal." Not sure whether this meant he wanted the page to say "Scandal," I called his attention to the vote, and he replied "my failure to vote was deliberate, not an oversight. I just don't feel strongly enough either way. 'Scandal,' 'reports' or even 'incident' (which I think no one has suggested) would all work for me."

 * Since I made the last page move, I'm going to (try to!) avoid doing anything more myself. I will leave it to you and/or others to add redirects and/or move the page.

 * If you are saying that you are OK with leaving the page as it is and setting up redirects, I certainly wouldn't object to that--the more redirects the merrier. Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal is, of course, already a redirect to the page as a result of the move. If you want to move the page again, I would be much happier with "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse" than with "Abu Ghraib prison abuse scandal", but I'm not sure whether Cecropia would accept that. As I understand it, his point is that the title shouldn't imply that everything mentioned in the article text is necessarily true. Dpbsmith 20:02, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I am indeed saying that we should probably keep it as is for now -- unless a consensus emerges that the name ought to be changed. Who knows? The press might start universally calling it "The Photo Imbroglio", or something equally silly. Or it might turn out to be Modus Operandi, but Abu Ghraib is where it was first caught. It's too soon to know, I think. Quadell (talk) 21:03, May 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * (And now it looks like it might not just be Abu Ghraib. Read this.)

Charges and Sentences
This article needs a clear and obvious section on who has been accused, charged and sentenced in this mess. Right now the names of those charged are at the bottom of a more general section, and there is no mention of the first sentence passed. I couldn't find a good place to add it. Rmhermen 14:03, May 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * This is tough. Different organizations become more useful as new facts emerge, almost daily. The article probably won't be really well-organized (for any length of time) until next year. Quadell (talk) 21:03, May 20, 2004 (UTC)

Spelling of misspelled "Rapist"
The picture on the arm says "Rapeist". The Taguba Report says "Rapest". Someone changed the Taguba report's spelling to say "Rapeist", but that's not correct. Either Taguba spelled the misspelling wrong, or it was written twice. I'm changing it back for this reason. Quadell (talk) 14:48, May 24, 2004 (UTC)

Poll on page title
As a result of the above, somewhat chaotic discussion, I have moved all suggested page title proposals here. You now have a chance to vote on your preferred title. We will use approval voting, so you can vote for as many titles as you like. This vote will not be binding, but if the current title doesn't come out on top we need to find a way to accommodate majority opinion. As deadline I suggest Sunday, May 30, 20:00 UTC.

I have copied existing votes here. No long comments in this round, please.--Eloquence*

Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal

 * 1) Quadell
 * 2) Eloquence
 * 3) Pcb21

Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse

 * 1) Dpbsmith (Avoids any suggestion that abuse did not really occur)
 * 2) Psb777
 * 3) Get-back-world-respect
 * 4) Eloquence*
 * 5) Saucepan (short, to-the-point, keywords for Google)
 * 6) The Anome
 * 7) Quadell (talk) 15:51, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * 8) Morven

Abuse of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces

 * 1) Eloquence* (allows us to cover Camp Bucca, etc.)
 * 2) Dpbsmith 12:53, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse reports

 * 1) User:Cecropia
 * 2) Dpbsmith 12:54, 28 May 2004 (UTC) (Acknowledges that article may and should refer to well-sourced but unproven reports)
 * 3) P0M 01:42, 31 May 2004 (UTC)

Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse incidents

 * 1) Quadell (talk) 15:51, Jun 1, 2004 (UTC)

Consensus on move
Well, it's June. It looks like we have a consensus. Quadell (talk) 15:50, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm happy with the consensus. (I'm assuming your perception of the consensus is the same as mine.) I moved the page last time, someone else should do it this time. Dpbsmith 16:23, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Isn't anyone going to do it (move the page to Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse ? AFAIK anyone can do it. Dpbsmith 19:34, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * And that's a wrap. Quadell (talk) 14:03, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)

Why is the article title now Coalition prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison, contrary to the above consensus? It would seem that attributing the abuses to a "Coalition" is misleading, since afaik, only members of the US military have been involved. dab 12:07, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

About the photos
First, are they actually in the public domain? The summaries for some of them contain things like "in the public domain, if you believe that the soldier in question took them as part of his official duties," and "public domain, seeing as they were taken by a soldier."

Second, the subjects of these pictures have stated that the very fact of being photographed naked was humiliating, given their culture's tradition of modesty surrounding nudity. Is it fair or right for us to be publishing them? Exploding Boy 15:41, Jul 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * It's been quite a while since I posted this comment. No one so far has seen fit to comment.  ANYBODY at all?  Exploding Boy 18:32, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * I see your point, especially the second paragraph. But I am ambivalent. No words could replace the pictures.  Maurreen 03:43, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

But does it matter and is that really the point? Exploding Boy 15:22, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)

I don't believe these photos are in the public domain. I'm going to list them on Possibly unfree images. I would like for these photos to be used on Wikipedia, but I don't think they can be, legally. If you feel this is in error, say so here, or on the images' discussions on the Possibly unfree images page. – Quadell (talk) (help)  16:40, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

Disagree with article move or rename
This article was moved September 21, 2004. It should have been left as "Abu Ghraib prison abuse." not "Coalition prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib prison." The former name is how most people would look it up, and it was chosen in a poll in June. Maurreen 16:23, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, but I'm planning another article about Abu Ghraib prison abuse about the torture, murder and rape carried out by Saddam's regime. It's hundreds of times worse and thus hundreds of times more significant.

 * You wouldn't want Wikipedia to give the impression that Abuse of Iraqi prisoners by coalition forces was the only crime to occur at Abu Ghraib prison, would you? --Uncle Ed 16:39, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * More articles are always a good thing I guess, although I can't help but notice that nobody seems to have been particularly motivated to spend time documenting Saddam's crimes at Abu Ghraib until after it became a source of emabarrassment for the US. Nevertheless, a clear majority of interested contributors was in favor of leaving the article at "Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse" last time this came up (just scroll up a bit).  Wouldn't it make sense to have another poll first, or at least some discussion, rather than just disregarding the poll whose result didn't come out the way you wanted? Saucepan 16:59, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Intro changes
I deleted parts of Ed's intro. They didn't belong in the intro and they were opinions that needed attribution. Also deleted "Englishwoman," which I suspect refers to "Lynndie England." Maurreen 17:03, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I also deleted the statement that the general in charge of the prison resigned. She no longer works at the prison, but she's still in the Army. Maurreen 03:57, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No one wants to write about murder, torture or rape. Period. That's why no one wants to write about what Saddam Hussein and his henchmen did. It has nothing to do with your imputation that it's from exculpatory motives. It goes without saying that the US is thousands of times better than Iraq, in terms of human rights. But if you dispute this, perhaps we should write some articles comparing the human rights record of the the United States with that of other countries, like the Sudan (slavery, mutilation, murder, rape) and all those Communist countries which killed 100 million civilians in "peacetime".

I'll come back and attribute the "opinions" which Maurreen deleted. --Uncle Ed 17:12, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)


text:
Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway

The Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway is a protected green belt corridor, more than 1+1/2 mi wide in places, that was the former route of the proposed Cross Florida Barge Canal. It is named for the leader of opposition to the Cross Florida Barge Canal, Marjorie Harris Carr, and was originally a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers canal project to connect the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean across Florida for barge traffic. Two sections were built, but the project was ultimately cancelled because of local opposition related to environmental concerns, including protecting the state's water supply and conservation of the Ocklawaha River Valley ecosystem, as well as national opposition for the costs being perceived as "government waste" with "limited national value." The greenway is part of the system of Florida State Parks, including the Santos Trail System, and is managed by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection.

History
The idea of a canal across the Florida peninsula was first proposed by Philip II of Spain in 1567 as a shorter and safer route for Spanish treasure ships. It was repeatedly considered over the years but found to be economically unviable. Secretary of War John C. Calhoun once again proposed a canal in 1818 as a remedy for commercial losses from shipwrecks and piracy. The Florida Railroad, finished in 1861, served a similar purpose, connecting the Atlantic Ocean at Fernandina to the Gulf of Mexico at Cedar Key.

In the 1930s, regional politicians lobbied the federal government to fund canal construction as an economic recovery program, including the creation of the Canal Authority of the State of Florida in 1933. President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized $5 million in funding for the project in 1935, and the entire project was estimated at $143 million to complete. In 1936, Michigan Senator Arthur Vandenberg challenged the canal, stating that the project never received authorization from the United States Congress. At the time, 13 million cubic yards of material had already been excavated, 5,000 acres of land cleared and four bridge piers constructed near Ocala. Funds for construction were also exhausted, so construction stopped. Work was reauthorized by Congress in 1942 as a national defense project, and $93 million was authorized for construction. Dams and locks were used to protect the underground water supply. Support for the project from Washington was sporadic, and funds were never allocated to the Army Corps to actually start construction.

Planning was once again given the go-ahead in 1963 with support from President John F. Kennedy, who allocated one million dollars to the project. The next year, President Lyndon Johnson set off the explosives that started construction. It was intended that the canal, along with the St. Johns-Indian River Barge Canal, would provide a quicker and safer route across Florida by 1971. Opponents subsequently campaigned against the canal on environmental grounds, and a lawsuit was filed against the Army Corps by the Florida Defenders of the Environment and the Environmental Defense Fund. The lawsuit resulted in a temporary injunction against the project in January 1971 and days later was halted by President Richard Nixon's signing of an executive order. Approximately $74 million had been spent on the project up until the 1971 cessation of activities.

The project was officially deauthorized by Congress in 1990, and the lands were turned over to the state of Florida for use as public conservation and recreation area, becoming the Cross Florida Greenway State Recreation and Conservation Area in 1991. In 1998, the land was renamed the Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway in honor of Marjorie Harris Carr, who had led opposition to the canal with the organization she co-founded, Florida Defenders of the Environment. Carr had died the prior year at age 82.

Canal route
The planned route of the canal followed the St. Johns River from the Atlantic coast to Palatka, the valley of the Ocklawaha River to the coastal divide, and the Withlacoochee River to the Gulf of Mexico. About 28% of the 107 mi project was built—the cross-country section 29.5375°N, -81.74667°W from the St. Johns River to the Ocklawaha River, part of the route along the Ocklawaha, and a small section 29.01278°N, -82.665°W at the Gulf of Mexico end up to the dammed Lake Rousseau.

Economic impact
The canal was intended to connect the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway with the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway at Withlacoochee Bay near Yankeetown. The military and economic impact was expected to be tremendous in that it "... promote the national defense and to promptly facilitate and protect the transport of materials and supplies needful to the Military Establishment...." The canal was intended to save travel time and distance for shipping companies by avoiding the longer route through the Florida Straits and link Florida's inland waterways to both coasts.

Bridges and other infrastructure
All the bridges over the St. Johns River north of the canal are high enough for ships or have movable sections. High bridges were built over the canal, as well as several over the Ocklawaha River where it was not widened to the canal. The following are the major roads, railroads, and locks and dams cross the path of the canal:
 * Buckman Lock (formerly St. Johns Lock)
 * SR 19 (high bridge)
 * George Kirkpatrick Dam (formerly Rodman Dam), south of the canal on the Ocklawaha River, forming Rodman Reservoir along the canal
 * Eureka Lock & Dam (unfinished)
 * CR 316 (high bridge)
 * SR 40, Bert Dosh Memorial Bridge (high bridge)
 * CR 314 (no bridge)
 * SR 35 (no bridge)
 * SR 464 (no bridge)
 * Florida Northern Railroad (no bridge)
 * CSX S-Line (no bridge)
 * US 27-301-441 (SR 25/SR 500) (no bridge, but several unused supports in the median)
 * CR 475 (no bridge)
 * I-75 (SR 93) (no bridge; recently built land bridge over I-75 for trail users)
 * SW 49th Avenue (no bridge; recently built underpass for trail users)
 * CR 484 (no bridge)
 * SR 200 (no bridge)
 * CSX line (low bridge over the existing Withlacoochee River)
 * US 41 (SR 45), Brittan Alexander Bridge (low bridge over the existing Withlacoochee River)
 * Inglis Lock (Inglis Dam is south of the canal on the Withlacoochee River, forming Lake Rousseau along the canal)
 * US 19-98 (SR 55), Trooper Ronald Gordon Smith Memorial Bridge (Twin bridges that replaced a much higher bridge in 2010)

Between Lake Rousseau and the Ocklawaha River, discontinuous unwatered excavations mark the canal's planned path, along with different vegetation patterns on the land acquired for the project (as seen from the air). A lock and dam was also built south of the canal on the Ocklawaha River near CR 464C in Marion County.

Project timeline

 * May 1933 - Canal Authority of the State of Florida was created to construct and maintain a deep-water ship canal across Florida.
 * 1935–1936 - Construction of a ship canal began under the Emergency Relief Appropriations Act of 1935, but work was suspended when Federal funds were depleted.
 * July 1942 - Congress authorized construction of the Cross Florida Barge Canal.
 * February 1964 - The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers began construction of the Cross Florida Barge Canal.
 * 1969 - The Environmental Defense Fund and others filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia seeking temporary and permanent injunction against the construction of the canal.
 * January 15, 1971 - The District Court granted a preliminary injunction halting any further construction activities pending the outcome of the litigation.
 * January 19, 1971 - President Richard Nixon signed an executive order suspending further work on the Barge Canal. When halted, the project was one-third complete and approximately $74 million had been spent on land acquisition and construction.
 * 1979 - Bills filed in Congress to deauthorize the Canal failed to pass.
 * May 22, 1990 - A revised federal bill was filed in the U.S. Senate by Senators Bob Graham and Connie Mack providing, among other things, for a minimum 300-yard wide greenway corridor to be maintained along the former Barge Canal route. This bill was agreed to by the entire Florida Congressional delegation.
 * May 31, 1990 - The Florida Legislature enacted a deauthorization bill conforming to the consensus bill filed in the U.S. Senate. Most of the provisions were not effective until Congress deauthorized the project.
 * October 27, 1990 - Senate Bill 2740 was passed by Congress and sent to the President for signature. The bill deauthorized the Cross Florida Barge Canal project upon acceptance by the Governor and Cabinet of the State of Florida.
 * November 28, 1990 - President George Bush signed SB 2740 into law deauthorizing the Cross Florida Barge Canal project and changing the purpose of the lands to recreation and conservation.
 * January 22, 1991 - The Governor and Cabinet of the State of Florida signed a resolution agreeing to the terms of the Federal deauthorization bill thereby officially deauthorizing the Cross Florida Barge Canal project. This action ultimately led to the creation of the Cross Florida Greenway State Recreation and Conservation Area.
 * 1998 - The Cross Florida Greenway was officially renamed the Marjorie Harris Carr Cross Florida Greenway in honor of Marjorie Harris Carr, who led the fight to stop the Cross Florida Barge Canal project.


text:
ǃXu (god)

ǃXu, also ǃXu꞉ba and sometimes ǃXo or ǃXo꞉ba, is a San rendering of the Khoikhoi word ǃKhu 'rich' and its derivation ǃKhub 'rich man, master', which was used by some Christian missionaries to the Khoikhoi to translate the word "Lord" in the Bible. Bleek reports that the ǂKxʼaoǁʼae rendered the word as ǃXo and the Naro as ǃXu꞉ba or ǃXo꞉ba when repeating things what the Khoikhoi had told them. It has entered the Juǀʼhoan language as the name of the Christian god.

Xu, a crater on Rhea, the second largest moon of Saturn, is named for ǃXu as the supposed "Bushman" Creator.

title: ǃXu (god)


text:
Berkeley Software Design

Berkeley Software Design, Inc. (BSDI or, later, BSDi), was a corporation which developed, sold licenses for, and supported BSD/OS (originally known as BSD/386), a commercial and partially proprietary variant of the BSD Unix operating system for PC compatible (and later, other) computer systems. The name was chosen for its similarity to "Berkeley Software Distribution" the source of its primary product (specifically 4.3BSD Networking Release 2).

BSDI was founded by Rick Adams and members of the Computer Systems Research Group (CSRG) at the University of California, Berkeley, including Keith Bostic, Kirk McKusick, Mike Karels, Bill Jolitz and Donn Seeley. Jolitz, Seeley and Trent Hein were working for Rick Adams' UUNET at the time and became BSDI's first employees when the company began operations in 1991. In December 1991, USENIX Secretary and Former Head of Software at Convex Computer, Rob Kolstad from University of Illinois, was hired and would take over company operations just two years later.

BSD/386 was released in January 1992. The full system, including source code retailed at $995, which was more affordable than the equivalent source code license for the rival UNIX System V from AT&T (which cost more than $20,000 in the late 1980s.) Under Rob Kolstad's direction, the company decided to pursue internet infrastructure as their primary customer audience. In the mid 1990s the top-10 websites in the world were almost all using BSD/386 as their BSD source codebase.

USL v. BSDi lawsuit
In late 1991, AT&T's Unix System Laboratories (USL) brought a lawsuit against BSDI, alleging that BSD/386 contained their proprietary trade secrets and source code. When USL were acquired by Novell, a settlement was reached in January 1994. BSDI agreed to base future releases of the product, now called BSD/OS, on the CSRG's 4.4BSD-Lite release which was declared free of any USL intellectual property. Rob Kolstad (of the University of Illinois and Convex Computer Corporation) was president of BSDI during this period and headed the company until the close of the decade.

Leadership in Datacenter Software
In the 1995 a survey of datacenter software platforms disclosed that BSDI was the #1 software used in data centers, by Internet servers. BSDI subsequently released an "Internet Server" version of their software, in contrast to the desktop version, which focused on providing the maximum number of open-source server products in the base distribution.

Mergers and sale
In 1999, the BSDI employees sought an initial public offering and installed a new president to reach this goal as soon as possible given the recent success of the Red Hat IPO in the Linux market. Unfortunately, this strategy was not successful and soon after Rob Kolstad had exited the company, it was facing bankruptcy.

In 2000 the company merged with Walnut Creek CDROM, a distributor of freeware and open source software on CD-ROM and shortly after that acquired Telenet System Solutions, Inc., an Internet infrastructure server supplier.

In 2001, under severe financial pressure from excessive leverage, BSDI (known as BSDi by that time) sold its software business unit (comprising BSD/OS and the former Walnut Creek FreeBSD and Slackware Linux open source offerings) to Wind River Systems and renamed the remainder iXsystems with a renewed focus on server hardware. Wind River dropped sponsorship of Slackware soon afterwards. and the FreeBSD unit was divested as a separate entity FreeBSD Mall, Inc. in 2002.

Faced with competition from open-source BSD- and Linux-based operating systems, Wind River discontinued BSD/OS in December 2003. Many of its technologies live on in community-led BSD derivatives like FreeBSD.

iXsystems
In 2002, OffMyServer acquired the iXsystems hardware business and reverted to the iXsystems name in 2005.

title: Berkeley Software Design


text: Category:Swiss violinists

title: Category:Swiss violinists


text:
Katikati

Katikati is a town in New Zealand (North Island) located on the Uretara Stream near a tidal inlet towards the northern end of Tauranga Harbour, 28 kilometres south of Waihi and 40 kilometres northwest of Tauranga. State Highway 2 passes through the town; a bypass scheduled to have begun construction in 2008 is on hold.

Katikati has become known for its many murals painted on walls of commercial buildings. These were started in the 1990s to regenerate tourist interest in the town and district, and led to the town being recognised New Zealand's 'Most Beautiful Small Town' award for towns of less than 8,000 population in 2005 by the Keep New Zealand Beautiful Society.

In 2018, Katikati was named "Avocado Capital of New Zealand . Besides its avocado orchards, there are many kiwi-fruit orchards in and around Katikati.

There are hot springs three kilometres to the south of Katikati at Sapphire Springs.

Pre-European history
Katikati was a Maori community that derived from the waka Mātaatua and is affiliated with the tribal group in Tauranga, Ngāi Te Rangi. It was later settled in 1875 by Ulster Scots people from County Tyrone in Ireland through the Orange Institution.

European settlement
The land upon which the town was built was taken from local Māori after the New Zealand Wars and was given to the settlers by the Central Government. The settlement was established by the Englishman George Vesey Stewart, who led two groups of mostly Irish settlers there aboard the ships Carisbrook Castle (1875) and Lady Jocelyn (1878).

The settlement was formed from two distinct groups: "the settlers useful" (tenant farmers) and "the settlers ornamental" (those with wealth). The settlement managed to withstand early economic problems and developed into a healthy town, based around farming and agriculture. In the latter 19th century, the kauri gum digging trade became an important industry in the area. Katikati was one of the southernmost areas where the gum could be found, as it is close to the historical southern limit for where kauri trees could thrive.

Marae
There are two marae in the Katikati area.

Te Rere a Tukahia Marae and its Tamawhariua meeting house are affiliated with the Ngāi Te Rangi hapū of Ngāi Tamawhariua.

Tuapiro Marae and its Ngā Kurī a Wharei meeting house are affiliated with the Ngāti Ranginui hapū of Ngāti Te Wai.

Transport
Katikati is situated on State Highway 2. There are proposals to bypass Katikati with an upgrade including two roundabouts.

Katikati was previously on the East Coast Main Trunk railway line. The railway closed in September 1978 when the Kaimai Tunnel opened. The railway from Apata through to Paeroa remained in place until 1980. There were proposals to keep the section of railway from Apata to Katikati before it was dismantled.

Demographics
Katikati covers 9.97 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

Before the 2023 census, the town had a smaller boundary, covering 9.53 km2. Using that boundary, Katikati had a population of 5,010 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 915 people (22.3%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 1,386 people (38.2%) since the 2006 census. There were 2,034 households, comprising 2,382 males and 2,625 females, giving a sex ratio of 0.91 males per female. The median age was 53.1 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 795 people (15.9%) aged under 15 years, 693 (13.8%) aged 15 to 29, 1,596 (31.9%) aged 30 to 64, and 1,923 (38.4%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 78.7% European/Pākehā, 11.5% Māori, 5.8% Pacific peoples, 11.4% Asian, and 1.1% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 28.3, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 43.4% had no religion, 36.5% were Christian, 1.0% had Māori religious beliefs, 3.4% were Hindu, 0.2% were Muslim, 0.7% were Buddhist and 6.2% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 492 (11.7%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 1,071 (25.4%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $22,800, compared with $31,800 nationally. 255 people (6.0%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 1,377 (32.7%) people were employed full-time, 546 (13.0%) were part-time, and 105 (2.5%) were unemployed.

Education
Katikati Primary School is a co-educational state primary school for Year 1 to 6 students, with a roll of as of.

Katikati College is a co-educational state intermediate and high school for Year 7 to 13 students, with a roll of.

Notable people

 * Alan Edward Mulgan, journalist, writer, and broadcaster
 * Bunny Walters, singer
 * Richard O'Brien, actor, director, and producer
 * Dave Gallaher, rugby player

title: Katikati


text: Category:Swiss musicians

title: Category:Swiss musicians


text: Category:Swiss poets

title: Category:Swiss poets


text:
Milo Rowell

Lt. Col. Milo E. Rowell (July 25, 1903 – October 7, 1977) was an American lawyer and Army officer best known for his role in drafting the Constitution of Japan.

Born in Fresno, California, Rowell graduated from Stanford University and Harvard Law School, and returned to Fresno in 1926 to open a private law practice there. He enlisted in the Army in 1943, where he studied occupation administration and also commanded troops in the Philippines.

Following Japan's surrender in 1945, Rowell moved to Tokyo and joined the occupation authority under Douglas MacArthur as Chief of Judicial Affairs. In this capacity, he worked with Brig. Gen. Courtney Whitney to prepare a draft constitution for the Diet of Japan to approve. Rowell extensively analyzed the existing Meiji Constitution, balancing it with the demands of Japanese lawyers to form a draft that was acceptable to both the Japanese government and the GHQ.

Rowell donated his papers to the University of Tokyo in 1965. They now serve as one of the key legislative history sources in Japanese constitutional law.

Later in life, Rowell supported establishment of a medical school in his home town of Fresno. This led to the establishment of the University of California San Francisco School of Medicine's Fresno-Central San Joaquin Valley Medical Education Program. In 1981 the auditorium of the new Medical Education Building on the campus of Fresno's VA Medical Center was named in Rowell's honor.

title: Milo Rowell


text:
Edward C. Stokes

Edward Casper Stokes (December 22, 1860 –November 4, 1942) was an American Republican Party politician, who served as the 32nd governor of New Jersey, from 1905 to 1908.

Biography
Stokes was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1860. He attended the Friends School in Rhode Island, and graduated from Brown University in 1883.

Stokes was elected to the New Jersey General Assembly in 1891, and was a member of the New Jersey Senate from Cumberland County between 1893 and 1901. He was the Governor between 1905 and 1908.

Stokes made his first attempt at the United States Senate in 1902 after the death of William Joyce Sewell, but fell short in voting by the Republican caucus, losing out to John F. Dryden.

Stokes won a narrow victory in the 1910 Republican primary for United States Senate, but two years before the direct election of Senators, Democrats controlled the legislature and Stokes was defeated. He was the Republican nominee for governor in 1913, but lost to James F. Fielder. From 1919 to 1927, he was the Chairman of the New Jersey Republican State Committee. Stokes ran for the U.S. Senate in 1928, but finished second in the Republican primary behind Hamilton Fish Kean. He chaired the state's GOP general election campaign that year.

Stokes was the President of Mechanics National Bank in Trenton and was President of the New Jersey Bankers Association. He lost much of his own money in the stock market crash, and in 1939 the New Jersey Legislature voted to give him a $2,500-a-year pension. Stokes turned the money down and instead took a state job advising New Jersey's public information office.

Stokes died November 4, 1942, aged 81. He is buried in Mount Pleasant Cemetery in Millville, New Jersey.

title: Edward C. Stokes


text: Category:Swiss pianists

title: Category:Swiss pianists