text:
Juanita Brooks

Juanita Pulsipher Brooks (January 15, 1898 – August 26, 1989) was an American historian and author, specializing in the American West and Mormon history. Her most notable contribution was her book related to the Mountain Meadows Massacre, to which her grandfather Dudley Leavitt was sometimes linked, and which caused tension between her and the church authorities. She also made significant archival contributions in the form of collected pioneer diaries documenting early Mormon history in the Dixie, Utah area. Brooks remained a faithful believer throughout her life.

Early life
Juanita Leone Leavitt was born to Henry Leavitt and Mary Hafen in Bunkerville, Nevada and raised there. Her grandparents on both sides were polygamists; her paternal grandfather, Dudley Leavitt, being one of the primary founders of Bunkerville. From a young age she developed an interest in history when, "her brilliant, sensitive, and imaginative mind was saturated from childhood in Mormon lore." She was often employed as a grade school teacher in nearby Southern Utah. In 1919 she married Ernest Pulsipher, who died of lymphoma a little more than a year later, leaving her with an infant son, Leonard Ernest Pulsipher. After his death, she resumed her job as a teacher, and then received her bachelor's degree from BYU. Her first published work was a poem titled "Sunrise from the Top of Mount Timp," which appeared in the LDS periodical Improvement Era in 1926.

Academia and family life
After her bachelors degree, she settled in St. George, Utah, and became an instructor of English and Dean of Women from 1925–1933 at the LDS-backed Dixie Junior College. While on a sabbatical from Dixie College from 1928–1929, she obtained a master's degree from Columbia University.

In 1933, the state of Utah discontinued funding for parochial Mormon post-secondary education. She resigned from the college after the program was cut and, in the same year, married a widower named Will Brooks. She became stepmother to his four sons, Walter, Bob, Grant, and Clair. Within five years the couple added a daughter, Willa Nita, and three sons to their family. Juanita Brooks had affectionate relationships with all of her children, including her step-sons, describing her family as "compound-complex". She would sometimes complain that she lacked time to write because of her family, but she also stated that her loved ones were essential to her happiness. Her children spoke highly of their mother at her funeral, telling stories of her nurturing character.

Her calling as a historian and writer was frequently at odds with her position as a believing Mormon woman. As a woman, she was expected to, and indeed, desired to devote her life to homemaking and motherhood. Her passion for research and writing was very unorthodox for her situation. As she wrote in an article for the Mormon studies journal, Dialogue, in regards to her writing, she "did not talk about it and did not work on it while they were around". She then described how she would always keep a basket of ironing work nearby, so that if a neighbor dropped by, she could cover her typewriter and appear to be doing housework.

Tension with the LDS Church
Despite her loyalty to and love for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Brooks anticipated excommunication upon the publication of The Mountain Meadows Massacre book. She greatly hoped for some sort of acknowledgement on behalf of general authorities, but she received none. In fact, such notable church authorities as Steven L. Richards, LeGrand Richards, and Harold B. Lee discouraged Brooks from pursuing her study of the Mountain Meadows Massacre and questioned her motives and research. No disciplinary action was taken against Brooks by the church, but an atmosphere of disgrace descended upon her and her protective husband. For a time, she was ostracized from both her local congregation and Church officials for her investigations on such touchy subjects, and she was no longer published within official LDS Church periodicals. While she would state her opinion fearlessly, she often felt conflicted and guilty in her choice to oppose church leaders. She was confronted with two conflicting forces- the good name of the Church and her own faith on the one hand, and history she knew to be true on the other. Juanita chose truth, no matter the cost. In Brooks' letters to general authorities who criticized her, she affirmed her intentions. She famously stated that "This study is not designed either to smear or to clear any individual; its purpose is to present the truth. I feel sure that nothing but the truth can be good enough for the church to which I belong."

Brooks has often been compared to Fawn Brodie, another Mormon historian who wrote No Man Knows My History, a similarly notorious biography of Joseph Smith. In fact, the two became good friends through their mutual connection of Dale Morgan, and frequently corresponded and assisted each other with scholarly work. Although Brodie was excommunicated for her book and Brooks was not, both were labeled as "dissenters".

Accomplishments and death
Brooks was known as a very humble woman, who, in spite of her numerous recognitions, awards, honors, and academic postings, downplayed her intelligence and achievements. Brooks served on the board of trustees for the Utah State Historical Society for twenty-four years. She received honorary degrees from Utah State University, Southern Utah State College, and the University of Utah. She was also awarded the Distinguished Service Award of the Utah Academy of Arts, Sciences, and Letters in 1958. In 1975, she was awarded an honorary membership in Phi Beta Kappa at the University of Utah and a writing award from Dixie College and the Southern Heritage Writers' Guild. From her home in Salt Lake City, Utah, she kept up close relationships to her children and her ailing mother, Mary, who died in 1980 Around 1976, she began a slow and debilitating mental and physical decline, which stifled her continuing research and hopes of publication. Brooks died in 1989 from Alzheimer's disease, leaving her lifelong autobiographical project unfinished. In honor of Juanita Brooks, a scholarship endowment was established at Utah Tech University, formerly Dixie State College, as well as an annual lecture series.

Pioneer diary archiving

Brooks' interest in pioneer diaries came from the stories she had been told about the Mountain Meadows Massacre from family members and friends as she was growing up and later began collecting diaries from the area during the time period so that she could gather more information about the events that occurred. Brooks assisted Nels Anderson, while the latter was a graduate student at Columbia doing field work in sociology in Southern Utah, by researching the experiences of Brooks' grandfather Dudley Leavitt. In 1934, while Anderson was on the U.S. National Labor Relations Board, he facilitated Brooks' assignment to start and manage a branch of the Emergency Relief Administration in southern Utah. Brooks fulfilled this objective by paying individuals to transcribe local pioneer's diaries. Brooks continued to devote herself to unearthing diaries and records of early settlers and organizing a Utah library of Mormons; and, in 1947, she joined the Board of the Utah Historical Society. The diary-collecting project was started under the Works Progress Administration during the Depression of the 1930s, and its transcripts were eventually cataloged at the Library of Congress.

This work brought her into contact with Dale Morgan, who was the supervisor for the Utah Writer's Project under the Works Progress Administration. She continued this work for the Huntington Library as a field fellow in the 1940s. These diaries were preserved for others use due to Juanita's diligent pursuit and copying.

Quicksand and Cactus: A Memoir of the Southern Mormon Frontier
Per the encouragement of Dale Morgan, Brooks' colleague in the Works Project Administration, Juanita began writing her autobiography, Quicksand and Cactus in which she describes her childhood and early adulthood through a mix of first and third point narrative. She began the manuscript in 1944 and attempted to get published multiple times through 1949 before temporarily abandoning the project to focus on the publication of The Mountain Meadows Massacre. During her revisions of the script, she took advice from Morgan to concentrate on the chapters on her childhood, as the chapters on her later life showed little enthusiasm from editors. Discouraged by rejections from publication firms, she also chose to fictionalize herself in the later versions of the script, substituting for herself a fictional character, Sal, a revision that has been subject to much controversy in the authenticity of her recount. Brooks defended her revision in a letter to D. L. Chambers stating, "While I can see that it may lose something in authenticity, I hope that it may gain in vitality. I had felt that, to justify the book, the subject of an autobiography should have achieved distinction in some field, while a good story may just be a good story."

Brooks revisited the book in 1970 after returning to Salt Lake City after the death of her husband Will Brooks. The next five years were painstaking to finish the book as Brooks found it challenging to stick to it for long periods of time, and her memory began to falter in regards to her first marriage and early widowhood. In 1977, her children moved her back to St. George and boxed the manuscripts, essentially marking the end of her writing career. The rest of the publication was left up to Trudy McMurrin, Brooks' assigned developmental editor at the University of Utah Press. McMurrin pieced together chapters and ideas, but a lack of dates and unity in style and themes and despite her best efforts, she deemed the work unfit to publish. Juanita's son Karl Brooks took the matters into his own hands and hired Richard Howe to prepare and publish the work. Howe consulted McMurrin, studied Juanita's correspondence with Morgan, and evaluated consistencies among the paper and typewriters used by Brooks to logically order chapters for its final publication. Thus, the autobiography is unfinished by Juanita herself, a tribute to an unfinished quality of Brooks' living personality.

The Mountain Meadows Massacre
Brooks' study of diaries and other personal journals enlivened her historiography, and her subsequent works reflected her scrutiny of such sources. Brooks went on to write numerous historical articles as well as a variety of family narratives including a biography of her pioneer grandfather Dudley Leavitt and a biography of her sheriff husband, Uncle Will Tells His Story. Brooks' notable books on Mormon history include The Mountain Meadows Massacre (1950) and John D. Lee: Zealot, Pioneer Builder, Scapegoat (1961). She also edited Hosea Stout's diaries. Brooks' book on the Mountain Meadows Massacre broke new ground. It was the first comprehensive account of the incident using modern historical methods. Juanita would write after the kids were in bed, often starting at 11:00 PM or midnight, and working for a few hours, then sleep but still get up with the family in the morning to get them all off to school and work. She would write while they were away by keeping her ironing handy; when someone would come over she would cover the typewriter with ironing and then iron until the visitor left. She seemed to have a great deal of ironing, and never seemed to get it finished. This inspired Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, a famous historian and professor: "For a young Mormon mother struggling to define an intellectual life, it was great to know that a renowned historian had once hid her typewriter under the ironing. Juanita Brooks' example taught me that housewives could be thinkers, too."

Brooks' interest in the Mountain Meadows Massacre impacted her life in a good way. The topic "gave unity to her life very much like the unity a plot gives a novel." More importantly, it has led her to receive a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. This helped her to further her research on the Mountain Meadows Massacre and other topics.

While living near the area in Southern Utah where the massacre occurred, Brooks investigated the events thoroughly but found no evidence of direct involvement by Brigham Young. However, she did charge Young with obstructing the investigation and with provoking the attack through his incendiary rhetoric, calling him "an accessory after the fact." Brooks suggested that Young became so fearful of federal invasion that he created a hothouse atmosphere where the militia saw threats everywhere.

Despite her notoriety within the church, The Mountain Meadows Massacre received resounding critical acclaim, and to this day, it remains the definitive history of the event.

Publications

 * A Mormon Chronicle: The Diaries of John D. Lee. Robert Glass Cleland, editor, and Juanita Brooks, editor. Huntington Library Press, reissue June 2004 (Paperback, 868pp), 3 Volumes in 1 book.  ISBN 0-87328-178-0.  First published in 1955.
 * Dudley Leavitt,: Pioneer to Southern Utah. Self-published, St. George, Utah. January 1942.
 * Emma Lee. Utah State University Press, Logan, Utah, 7th Printing 1984. ISBN 0-87421-121-2. First published in 1975.
 * Frontier tales; true stories of real people. Western Text Society, Special publication – 1972.
 * History of the Jews in Utah and Idaho 1853–1950. Salt Lake City, Utah, Western Epics, June 1973.
 * Jacob Hamblin, Mormon apostle to the Indians. reissue 1980.
 * John Doyle Lee: Zealot, Pioneer Builder, Scapegoat. Utah State University Press, Logan, Utah, reissue November 1992 (paperback, 404 pp). ISBN 0-87421-162-X. First published in 1961.
 * Lore of faith & folly. Cheney, Thomas Edward, Austin E. Fife, and Juanita Brooks, eds. Bay Country Publishing Corp, 1971.
 * The Mountain Meadows Massacre; University of Oklahoma Press (Tdr) reissue May 1991; (softcover, 318 pages). ISBN 0-8061-2318-4. First published in 1950.
 * On the ragged edge: The life and times of Dudley Leavitt. Salt Lake City, Utah, Utah State Historical Society, 1973.
 * Quicksand and cactus: A memoir of the southern Mormon frontier. Logan, Utah, Utah State University Press, reissue 1982.
 * On the Mormon Frontier: The Diary of Hosea Stout, edited by Juanita Brooks. First edition 1964. Published by University of Utah Press. Republished in 1974 by University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, Utah. (Juanita's daughter-in-law was the great granddaughter of Hosea Stout).
 * Uncle Will Tells His Story, published by Taggart & Company, Salt Lake City, Utah. 249 pages. Only 2,500 copies were printed. (Uncle Will is the biography of her husband, written as though he was telling her stories of his life. According to Ken Sanders Rare Books in Salt Lake City, Utah, Juanita Brooks was the first-place winner of the Utah State Institute of Fine Arts Creative Writing Competition for autobiography in 1969).
 * The Christmas Tree, published by Peregrine Smith Inc., One small edition, 1972 Hardcover, Jaunita and sister, Charity, manage to wrest a Christmas "tree" from the treeless Nevada desert where they live.

title: Juanita Brooks


text:
Nunatsiaq

Nunatsiaq (ᓄᓇᑦᓯᐊᖅ in Inuktitut syllabics) is the Inuktitut term for the Northwest Territories. Since the creation of the territory of Nunavut in 1999, it has seen limited use in English, although it remains part of the name of several institutions from before that time.

 * The Nunatsiaq News
 * The former electoral district of Nunatsiaq in use from 1979 to 1997, which covered the Inuit-inhabited portions of the Northwest Territories. See Nunavut (electoral district).

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

title: Nunatsiaq


text:
Voice chat in online gaming

Voice chat is telecommunication via voice over IP (VoIP) technologies—especially when those technologies are used as intercoms among players in multiplayer online games. The VoIP functionality can be built into some games, be a system-wide communication system, or a third-party chat software.

History
Voice chat in video games began in the sixth generation with the Sega Dreamcast (circa 1999). Some games, including Seaman and Alien Front Online included built in voice chat functionality, though it required an active subscription to the Dreamcast's online service, SegaNet.

In 2001, Sony released the Network adapter for their PlayStation 2 video game console, which allowed voice chatting with a headset. In 2002, Microsoft launched the Xbox Live service, including support for voice chat. Later, Microsoft required all Xbox Live console game developers to integrate voice chat capability into their games and bundled a microphone and headset with the Xbox Live retail unit. In 2005, Nintendo launched the Nintendo Wi-Fi Connection, an online multiplayer service for both the Nintendo DS and for the Wii. Metroid Prime Hunters, which was released in March 2006, was the first game that allowed voice chatting through the Nintendo DS's microphone. Nintendo also released a Nintendo DS headset for voice chat alongside the release of Pokémon Diamond and Pearl (2006).

2010s
Starting in the 2010s, third-party software have become very popular among gamers, even when in game VoIP services are available. Notable software includes Discord, Ventrilo, TeamSpeak, and Mumble. Support for Discord was added to the Xbox Series X|S and Xbox One consoles in 2022, with support coming to PlayStation 5 in 2023.

Impact
While voice chat has become a big hit in console games, also leads to problems such as griefing, cyberbullying, harassment, and scams.

title: Voice chat in online gaming


text:
Vultee P-66 Vanguard

The Vultee P-66 Vanguard was a United States Army Air Forces fighter aircraft. It was initially ordered by Sweden, but by the time the aircraft were ready for delivery in 1941, the United States would not allow them to be exported, designating them as P-66s and retaining them for defensive and training purposes. Eventually, a large number were sent to China where they were pressed into service as combat aircraft with mixed results.

Design and development
Vultee's chief engineer Richard W. Palmer, made an all out effort to secure substantial military orders on the eve of WWII. According to Jonathan Thompson, "Palmer and his staff project no fewer than four types, all with the same wing design and similar fuselage structure; the model 48 pursuit fighter, model 51 basic combat, model 54 advanced trainer and model 54A basic trainer." Sweden placed an order for 111 48Cs, but they were diverted for use by the USAAF as the P-66, and then diverted to India and China. The Vultee BC-51 lost out to North America's AT-6 as the Air Corps' advanced trainer, though one was delivered as the BC-3. The Vultee model 54A, similar to the model 54 but with fixed landing gear, was selected by the USAAC as the BT-13.

In 1938, Richard W. Palmer started the detailed design of the V-48 fighter member of the quartet. The aircraft featured a metal-covered, semi-monocoque fuselage and fully retractable landing gear, and was powered by a Pratt & Whitney R-1830 air-cooled radial engine. During construction of the first prototype, a decision was made to lengthen the propeller shaft and install a tight cowling to provide a pointed nose to reduce drag. The first aircraft flew in September 1939 piloted by Vance Breese, and was assigned registration number NX21755. The fighter was named the Vanguard. On 9 May 1940, the prototype collided with a Lockheed Sirius while landing at Vultee airfield, the impact severing one main undercarriage leg. Nevertheless, Breese skillfully landed the airplane with little additional damage. It was subsequently rebuilt with the orthodox cowling as employed on subsequent machines.

Operational history
On 6 February 1940, the Swedish government ordered 144 Vanguards as the V-48C. The production prototype flew on 6 September 1940. The model V-48C was similar to the V-48X except for installation of a later version of the R-1830 engine with better higher altitude performance and provision for four .30 in machine guns in the wings and two .50 in machine guns in the fuselage.

When production deliveries began in September 1941, the U.S. government placed an embargo on exporting the aircraft to Sweden. In the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, all Vanguards were assigned the designation P-66. Production ended in April 1942. Approximately 50 aircraft were retained by the USAAF and primarily used at pursuit training bases in the western U.S. and were deployed to the 14th Pursuit Group in defensive roles. Although pilots were impressed by the P-66's handling, the type was considered less than robust and a tendency to ground-loop led to 15 aircraft being destroyed in landing accidents.

The British government took possession of 100 P-66s as the Vanguard I with plans to use the aircraft as an advanced trainer in Canada. After concluding their trials however, the British then relinquished the aircraft to China where 104 Vanguards (including USAAC examples) were shipped under the Lend-Lease program. They were originally intended to equip the 3rd American Volunteer Group (AVG); however, plans for additional groups were dropped after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

The Chinese received the assembled fighters via India by late 1942; Chinese Vanguards had USAAF insignia and serials as well as Chinese markings and Vultee serials on factory models. The undistinguished combat record of the Vanguard in China was due to problems that began in transit where a number of Vanguards were destroyed during tests in India and others lost while en route to China. Assembled P-66s were deemed unairworthy and abandoned at Karachi resulting in only 12 Vanguards on station at Kunming with the 74th Fighter Squadron of the 23rd Fighter Group, but this unit saw little action. Two Chinese squadrons from the 3rd Group and the 5th Group based at An-Su saw combat action with the Vanguard from August 1943 onward. However, many P-66s were destroyed on the ground during Japanese attacks while several were shot down in error when they were mistaken for the Nakajima firm's Ki-43 "Oscar" and Ki-44 "Tojo". Although the Vanguard possessed a top speed of 340 mph, it was no match for the agile Japanese fighters in high-g maneuvers and relied on hit-and-run tactics against the Japanese.

The P-66 in Chinese service was largely replaced by Curtiss P-40s in 1943. A number of surviving P-66 Vanguards were placed in caves for storage at Chungking for use in the civil war against Mao's Communists. As late as 1947, many were reportedly still in their crates.

Operators

 * undefined
 * Chinese Nationalist Air Force
 * 3rd Group
 * 5th Group
 * Royal Air Force, not used, aircraft originally ordered by Sweden, aircraft were delivered to China.
 * 🇺🇸 United States
 * United States Army Air Forces
 * United States Army Air Forces

title: Vultee P-66 Vanguard


text: Category:Norwegian songwriters

title: Category:Norwegian songwriters


text: File:Jerky Boys The Movie Soundtrack.jpg


text:
Arizona State Route 87

State Route 87 (SR 87) is a 272.66 mi north–south highway that travels from I-10 near Picacho northward to State Route 264 near Second Mesa.

Route description
SR 87 begins 0.95 mi to the north of I-10 at a junction with an unsigned orphan segment of SR 84, which serves as a direct connection to I-10 at Exit 211. SR 87 travels north for 16 mi toward Coolidge, passing by the town of Eloy. In Coolidge, State Route 87 is known as Arizona Boulevard.

The highway leaves Coolidge heading northwest and travels as a two-lane rural road through the Gila River Indian Community, until it reaches a junction with SR 587 on the border between the Gila River Indian Community and Chandler. North of this junction, SR 87 travels along Arizona Avenue in Chandler, intersecting Loop 202 before entering Mesa and becoming Country Club Drive. The highway then intersects with U.S. 60 and SR 202 for a second time, before leaving Mesa as the Beeline Highway. The Mesa and Chandler sections of SR 87 are discontinuous, with most of these sections between McKellips Road in Mesa and Cloud Road in Chandler being owned and maintained by their respective cities. A 1.5 mi ADOT-owned segment north of the Western Canal and south of Baseline Road forms the city limits separating Mesa from Chandler, and also the city limits separating Gilbert from Mesa. The only major portions where SR 87 technically exists wholly inside Mesa city limits (under ADOT ownership) is the area surrounding US 60 and then a short length south of the Loop 202 Red Mountain Freeway north of McKellips Rd.

SR 87 is known as the Beeline Highway from McDowell Road, just north of Mesa, passing by Fountain Hills and to Payson. This portion of SR 87 is entirely a four-lane highway. There is a stretch of road where the highway splits, taking different canyons through the Mazatzal Mountains south of Payson, near the junction with SR 188. The old alignment is currently the southbound lanes, while a new alignment was built for the northbound lanes. There is a stretch where the roads cross-over each other because of the difference in elevations of the two canyons.

SR 87 is part of the National Highway System between I-10 and Payson. ADOT is currently studying a stretch of I-10 to widen and improve interchanges along its stretch from Tucson to Casa Grande, including the interchange with SR 87.

History
SR 87 was designated in 1924 from Casa Grande to Mesa. In 1927, it was rerouted to end in Eloy, and the old route was renumbered AZ 187. In 1959, it extended to Strawberry Junction. In 1967, it extended north over State Route 65 to its current terminus. By 1983, almost half of the Beeline Highway, between Mesa and Payson, had already been widened to either three or four lanes; in 1989, work began to convert the entire highway to four lanes, and was completed in 2001.

Notable destinations along SR 87 include the Mogollon Rim and Tonto Natural Bridge.

title: Arizona State Route 87


text:
131 (number)

131 (one hundred [and] thirty-one) is the natural number following 130 and preceding 132.

In mathematics
131 is a Sophie Germain prime, an irregular prime, the second 3-digit palindromic prime, and also a permutable prime with 113 and 311. It can be expressed as the sum of three consecutive primes, 131 = 41 + 43 + 47. 131 is an Eisenstein prime with no imaginary part and real part of the form $$3n - 1$$. Because the next odd number, 133, is a semiprime, 131 is a Chen prime. 131 is an Ulam number.

131 is a full reptend prime in base 10 (and also in base 2). The decimal expansion of 1/131 repeats the digits 007633587786259541984732824427480916030534351145038167938931 297709923664122137404580152671755725190839694656488549618320 6106870229 indefinitely.

In the military

 * Convair C-131 Samaritan was an American military transport produced from 1954 to 1956
 * Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA-131) is a United States Navy F/A-18C Hornet fighter squadron stationed at Naval Air Station Oceana
 * Tiger 131 is a German Tiger I heavy tank captured in Tunisia by the British 48th Royal Tank Regiment during World War II
 * USNS Mission Santa Barbara (T-AO-131) was a Mission Buenaventura-class fleet oiler during World War II
 * USS Bandera (APA-131) was a is a United States Navy Haskell-class attack transport ship during World War II
 * USS Buchanan (DD-131) was a United States Navy Wickes-class destroyer
 * USS General T. H. Bliss (AP-131) was a United States Navy General G. O. Squier-class transport ship during World War II
 * USS Hammann (DE-131) was a United States Navy Edsall-class destroyer escort during World War II
 * USS Melucta (AK-131) was a United States Navy Crater-class cargo ship during World War II
 * USS Walter X. Young (APD-131) was a ship of the United States Navy during World War II
 * ZIL-131 is a 3.5-ton 6x6 army truck

In transportation

 * London Buses route 131 is a Transport for London contracted bus route in London
 * The Fiat 131 Mirafiori small/medium family car produced from 1974 to 1984
 * STS-131 is a NASA Contingency Logistic Flight (CLF) of the Space Shuttle Atlantis which launched in April 2010

In other fields
131 is also:
 * The year AD 131 or 131 BC
 * 131 AH is a year in the Islamic calendar that corresponds to 748 – 749 CE.
 * 131 Vala is an inner main belt asteroid
 * Iodine-131, or radioiodine, is a radioisotope of iodine for medical and pharmaceutical use
 * ACP-131 is the controlling publication for listing of Q codes and Z codes, as published by NATO Allied countries
 * Sonnet 131 by William Shakespeare
 * 131 is the medical emergency telephone number in Chile
 * United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Form I-131 to apply for a travel document, reentry permit, refugee travel document or advance parole
 * 131 is the ID3v1 tag equivalent to Indie music

title: 131 (number)


text:
The Jerky Boys (soundtrack)

The Jerky Boys (Original Motion Picture Soundtrack) is the original soundtrack album of the 1995 James Melkonian's film The Jerky Boys: The Movie. It was released on January 24, 1995, via Select/Atlantic Records.

Other songs
These songs did appear in the film but were not included on the soundtrack:
 * "The Jerky Boys Sample" written by John G. Brennan and performed by the Jerky Boys
 * "Hard Hats" and "The Jerky Groove" written by Derrick Perkins and performed by Perkins and Paul Karpinski
 * "The Swing Thing" written by George Romanis
 * "Neopolitan Mandolin" written by Alessandro Alessandroni

title: The Jerky Boys (soundtrack)


text: Talk:The Jerky Boys (soundtrack)

title: Talk:The Jerky Boys (soundtrack)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antidisrevisionmentarianism

Antidisrevisionmentarianism
No Google hits for this word, nor even "Antidisrevision." - RedWordSmith 23:33, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Nor for "disrevisionist" (mentioned in the article), and only one for "disrevision" (and this one was just a file name, compound of "discrimination" and "revision"). - Mike Rosoft 16:59, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete Apparent neologism, and one that makes my head hurt.--Wolfychan 00:12, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * The neologisms, they burn. Please delete. --Slowking Man 01:26, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Possible attempt to cheat at scrabble. Average Earthman 11:56, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Your copy of Scrabble must have a larger board than mine. Delete Pakaran. 16:48, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's a perfectly cromulent word. Perhaps it needs further etymologic fleshing out and placement into the wiki dictionary.
 * It's a perfectly feculent word and needs flushing out.
 * Unsigned votes aren't counted on VfD. Bearcat 07:32, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Supercromuflagellistic neologicocious/Say it loud and say it proud and say it haliticious/Sesquipedal to the metal, nauseous, vomitrocious/Supercromuflagellistic neologicocious! Delete. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:46, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC) P. S. Not in AHD4. P. P. S. "Your search - Antidisrevisionmentarianism - did not match any documents." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 01:47, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism.   — Gwalla | Talk 01:56, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Neologism obviously formed on antidisestablishmentarianism. Good thing I bought some Advil today. Delete. Bearcat 07:32, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * An article about a bogus word. Delete. - Mike Rosoft 16:59, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
Acute toxicity

Acute toxicity describes the adverse effects of a substance that result either from a single exposure or from multiple exposures in a short period of time (usually less than 24 hours). To be described as acute toxicity, the adverse effects should occur within 14 days of the administration of the substance.

Acute toxicity is distinguished from chronic toxicity, which describes the adverse health effects from repeated exposures, often at lower levels, to a substance over a longer time period (months or years).

It is widely considered unethical to use humans as test subjects for acute (or chronic) toxicity research. However, some information can be gained from investigating accidental human exposures (e.g., factory accidents). Otherwise, most acute toxicity data comes from animal testing or, more recently, in vitro testing methods and inference from data on similar substances.

Regulatory values
Limits for short-term exposure, such as STELs or CVs, are defined only if there is a particular acute toxicity associated with a substance. These limits are set by the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), based on experimental data. The values set by these organizations do not always coincide exactly, and in the chemical industry it is general practice to choose the most conservative value in order to ensure the safety of employees. The values can typically be found in a material safety data sheet. There are also different values based on the method of entry of the compound (oral, dermal, or inhalation).
 * Threshold limit value-time-weighted-average: The maximum concentration to which a worker can be exposed every work day (8 hours) and experience no adverse health effects.
 * Short-Term Exposure Limit, STEL or Threshold limit value-short-term exposure limit, TLV-STEL: The concentration which no person should be exposed to for more than 15 minutes during an 8-hour work day.
 * Ceiling value, CV or Threshold limit value-ceiling, TLV-C: The concentration which no person should ever be exposed to.

Experimental values

 * No-observed-adverse-effect level, NOAEL
 * Lowest-observed-adverse-effect level, LOAEL
 * Maximum tolerable concentration, MTC, LC0; Maximum tolerable dose, MTD, LD0
 * Minimum lethal concentration, LCmin; Minimum lethal dose, LDmin
 * Median lethal concentration, LC50; Median lethal dose, LD50; Median lethal time, LT50 (LT50)
 * Absolute lethal concentration, LC100; Absolute lethal dose, LD100

The most referenced value in the chemical industry is the median lethal dose, or LD50. This is the concentration of substance which resulted in the death of 50% of test subjects (typically mice or rats) in the laboratory.

Responses and treatments
When a person has been exposed to an acutely toxic dose of a substance, they can be treated in a number of ways in order to minimize the harmful effects. The severity of the response is related to the severity of the toxic response exhibited. These treatment methods include (but are not limited to):
 * Emergency showers used for removing irritating or hazardous chemicals from the skin.
 * Emergency eye washes used for removing any irritating or hazardous chemicals from the eyes.
 * Activated charcoal used to bind and remove harmful substances consumed orally. This is used as an alternative to conventional stomach pumping.

title: Acute toxicity


text:
Pilsbury

Pilsbury is a hamlet in the English county of Derbyshire, approximately 2 miles north of Hartington. It is on the side of the valley of the River Dove that, thereabouts, forms the border with the county of Staffordshire.

History
Pilsbury was mentioned in the Domesday book as belonging to Henry de Ferrers and being worth ten shillings. Just to the north of the hamlet is the site of Henry de Ferrers' Pilsbury Castle.

title: Pilsbury


text:
User talk:Mdd

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

We owe everything to our MetaNatural Parents God and godmother you'll never get her name from any of us
was 2048 time times and half a time. Let's speed that up. 4.53.77.167 (talk) 03:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mdd


text:
Public Service Enterprise Group

The Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. (PSEG) is a publicly traded diversified energy company headquartered in Newark, New Jersey, US established in 1985 with a legacy dating back to 1903.

The company's largest subsidiary is Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G). The Public Service Electric and Gas Company is a regulated gas and electric utility company established in 1928 serving the state of New Jersey and it is New Jersey's oldest and largest investor owned utility company; it was originally a subsidiary of the New-Jersey-based Public Service Corporation.

History
PSE&G/PSEG origins date back to 1903 with the defunct Public Service Corporation.

Public Service Electric and Gas Company
The Public Service Electric and Gas Company, commonly referred to as PSE&G, is the primary subsidiary of the Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) and was established in 1928.

The Public Service Corporation was formed in 1903 by combining more than 400 gas, electric and transportation companies in New Jersey. In 1928, the corporation merged its electric and gas utilities into a single company, PSE&G. Also in 1928, Public Service Coordinated Transport was formed as an umbrella for the transit businesses. The parent Public Service Corporation was dissolved in 1948 and PSE&G became an independent company, with Public Service Coordinated Transport as a subsidiary.

PSCT was renamed Transport of New Jersey in 1971, and sold to New Jersey Transit in 1980, leaving PSE&G exclusively in the utility business.

Public Service Enterprise Group
The Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG) was established in 1985 to take control of the Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G).

In 1989, Public Service Enterprise Group established the Enterprise Diversified Holdings Inc. (now PSEG Energy Holdings) to begin consolidation of unregulated businesses. In 2000, Public Service Enterprise Group split off the PSE&G subsidiary's unregulated national power generation assets to form PSEG Power, while the PSE&G subsidiary continued operating in New Jersey as a regulated gas and electric delivery company.

In June 2005, the acquisition of PSEG by Exelon, a Chicago and Philadelphia based utility conglomerate, was approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; however, the deal was never consummated and eventually dissolved after it became clear that it would not win state regulatory approval from the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities.

In 2009, PSEG began installing solar panels on 200,000 utility poles in its service area in a project costing $773 million, the largest such project in the world. The Solar 4 All project increased the capacity for renewable energy in New Jersey and was completed in 2013. In addition, PSEG is building four solar farms in Edison, Hamilton, Linden, and Trenton.

In August 2020, about 400,000 customers on Long Island and 490,000 customers in New Jersey under the jurisdiction of PSEG were left without power as a result of Hurricane Isaias. Although some got power back within hours of Isaias, some had to wait days for power to be restored. As of August 10, 2020, around 42,000 Long Island customers were still without power, while around 20,000 New Jersey customers were without power. State and local officials have called for more accountability from PSEG after the storm passed. Governor Andrew Cuomo threatened to take away operating licenses from PSEG and ConEdison, while Nassau County Executive Laura Curran along with several state senators called for reimbursement to customers for their failure to respond quickly.

Operations
Public Service Enterprise Group has three operating subsidiaries:
 * Public Service Electric and Gas (PSE&G)
 * PSEG Long Island
 * PSEG Power

Public Service Electric and Gas

PSE&G serves the population in an area consisting of a 2600 sqmi diagonal corridor across the state from Bergen to Gloucester Counties. PSE&G is the largest provider of gas and electric service, servicing 1.8 million gas customers and 2.2 million electric customers in more than 300 urban, suburban and rural communities, including New Jersey's six largest cities.

PSEG's transmission line voltages are 500 kilovolts (kV), 345 kV, 230 kV and 138 kV with interconnections to utilities in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New York. The company's subtransmission voltages are 69 kV and 26 kV. PSEG's distribution voltages are 13.2 kV and 4.16 kV.

PSEG Power
PSEG Power has four main subsidiaries: PSEG Nuclear, PSEG Fossil, PSEG Energy Resources & Trade, and PSEG Power Ventures.

PSEG Nuclear operates three nuclear reactors at two facilities in Lower Alloways Creek Township. PSEG owns one reactor at Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station and operates two reactors at Salem Nuclear Power Plant where PSEG Nuclear holds a 57 percent stake (in partnership with Exelon Corporation). The three plants receive $300 million per year in subsidies. Exelon also operates two reactors at Peach Bottom Nuclear Generating Station in a 50/50 joint venture with PSEG.

PSEG Long Island
PSEG Long Island provides electricity to 1.1 million customers in Nassau and Suffolk counties, and the Rockaway Peninsula of Queens, part of New York City. This system operates under an agreement with the Long Island Power Authority, the state agency that owns the system, that went into effect January 1, 2014. PSEG was selected to essentially privatize LIPA after the controversies surrounding Hurricane Sandy, taking over near complete control of the system including its brand name, whereas before this agreement only a number of functions were performed by the private sector and the system was operated under the LIPA name.

Environmental record
In 2001, NOAA presented PSEG with The Walter B. Jones Memorial and NOAA Excellence Awards in Coastal and Ocean Resource Management in the category of Excellence in Business Leadership for its Estuary Enhancement Program.

title: Public Service Enterprise Group


text:
Raynald Blais

Raynald Blais (January 5, 1954 – September 26, 2023) was a Canadian politician who represented the district Gaspésie—Îles-de-la-Madeleine in the House of Commons of Canada from 2004 to 2011 as a member of the Bloc Québécois.

Born in Port-Daniel, Quebec, he was first elected in 2004, but ran in the 2000 Canadian federal election in the riding of Bonaventure—Gaspé—Îles-de-la-Madeleine—Pabok and lost to Georges Farrah of the Liberal Party of Canada. Blais had 15,532 votes. Blais was a former journalist and political assistant.

Blais died on September 26, 2023, at the age of 69.

title: Raynald Blais


text:
Daily Chronicle

The Daily Chronicle was a left-wing British newspaper that was published from 1872 to 1930 when it merged with the Daily News to become the News Chronicle.

Foundation
The Daily Chronicle was developed by Edward Lloyd out of a local newspaper that had started life as the Clerkenwell News and Domestic Intelligencer, set up as a halfpenny 4-page weekly in 1855.

Launched after the duties on advertising and published news had been abolished in 1853 and July 1855, this local paper specialised in small personal ads. At first, it carried about three times as much advertising as it did local news.

As the formula proved popular, it grew in size and frequency and often changed its name to match. In 1872, it finally changed from the London Daily Chronicle and Clerkenwell News to plain Daily Chronicle. It was then being published daily in eight pages, half of which were news and half advertising.

Edward Lloyd was keenly interested in advertising. It had the potential to generate substantial income and so allow the paper's cover price to be kept low. In time it contributed about 40% of Chronicle revenues. Demand was strong enough to charge a good price per line but, even so, advertising had to be limited to no more than half the paper. The lobby at 81 Fleet Street served as an informal labour exchange where advertisers and targets would search each other out in person.

Early years
Lloyd bought the paper in 1876, paying the owner £30,000 for the title and spending a further £150,000 on setting it up (about £19m in modern money). The Fleet Street office cost a further £40,000 a few years later.

Only a small circle knew about his plan and the public was taken by surprise when it appeared in national daily guise on 28 May 1877. They clearly liked what they read and the new paper was a success from the start. It had inherited a circulation of about 40,000 in 1877 and this rose to 200,000 in a year. It had risen to 400,000 by the outbreak of war in 1914 and doubled during the war. It was reputedly the best selling daily in the 1890s and, during the war, sold more copies than the Times, Telegraph, Morning Post, Evening Standard and Daily Graphic combined.

Lloyd was a great believer in news – objective reporting of facts, unadorned by comment or speculation. The scope and quality of the Chronicle’s reporting secured its popularity. It was the first Fleet Street paper to report industrial disputes systematically. This echoed the paper’s political stance, but it also met readers’ need to know about what was a new legal regime at the time – freedom to join a trade union and picket workplaces.

The paper followed the London County Council and its first election in 1889, and covered religion and the affairs of the church. In the 1880s, it created a special section for colonial news under the title "Greater Britain Day by Day". It also led the way in using specialist correspondents. Ample space was made available for books, literary extracts and the theatre.

Politically the paper was left of centre. It supported the radical wing of the Liberal Party but it might well have supported the Labour Party, had that existed in 1877. From 1892, it supported Irish home rule. John O'Connor Power, Irish MP and powerful orator, was one of its liveliest leader writers.

The Chronicle’s appearance coincided with the expansion of the London suburbs and the commuting by train that went with it. It competed with the Telegraph for that market and for those who felt that elite papers like the Times were not for them. The breadth of its news coverage was welcomed by many because it deliberately ranged far and wide – far beyond the Westminster affairs that dominated Fleet Street at the time.

Middle years
During Lloyd's lifetime, the editor was a literary Irish journalist, Robert Boyle, who had helped Lloyd with the conversion of the paper. He maintained the local news coverage inherited from the Clerkenwell paper, but this was later dropped. He died in February 1890, two months before Lloyd.

The next editor, Alfred Fletcher, had been assistant to Boyle and had a more pronounced left-wing approach. After he left the Chronicle, he stood as a Liberal candidate for Parliament twice but was not elected. Many of his later writings were on education.

In 1894, Henry Massingham was appointed editor. Generally recognised as one of the leading journalists of the day, with influence in the corridors of power, he was able to build up a newspaper that he valued highly.

Although he worked for the Chronicle for a decade, Massingham was editor for just five years. On foreign policy, he was a great believer in the power of diplomacy and expressed his opposition to the Boer War with some vehemence. This went down badly with readers, many of whom had family or friends risking and losing their lives for that cause. As sales were lost, he was asked to resign by Frank Lloyd, son of Edward Lloyd and managing director of the company that owned the paper.

Politically, Massingham was at the radical end of the Liberal Party. He had edited the radical evening paper, The Star, in 1890–91. He went on to become editor of the Nation, where he transferred its allegiance to the Labour Party during the war. He resigned in 1923 when John Maynard Keynes, a Liberal, took it over.

In 1899, the Chronicle's former foreign editor, William Fisher, became editor, handing over to Robert Donald in 1904.

Donald had worked as news editor for the Chronicle but had taken time off journalism to experience an unrelated occupation – promoting a hotel. From 1906 he also edited Lloyd's Weekly News, the Sunday newspaper owned by the Lloyd family.

He was thoughtful and principled, with a firm belief in objective reporting and editorial independence. Under his direction, the paper was broadly supportive of the radical wing of the Liberal Party under David Lloyd George. It was never anti-war, but it was critical of political interference in military strategy.

Buy-out
Donald had got to know Lloyd George well, although he never hesitated to point out failings if justified. After he became prime minister at the end of 1916, Lloyd George valued the Chronicle's impartial and objective coverage and found it the most acceptable of the non-Conservative papers. He misled himself into thinking that Donald was an uncritical supporter, drawing confirmation from Donald's willingness to advise him on the official propaganda effort in 1917 and then to accept an official position – "director of propaganda in neutral countries".

In fact, the relationship between Donald and Lloyd George, always arm's-length in Donald's eyes, had been fatally soured by dealings in 1917 that were unknown to the public. Lloyd George had tried to buy the Chronicle through his political allies. Frank Lloyd, as owner, named his price. Although a realistic valuation, £900,000 was too high for the initial backer, the Liberal peer Lord Leverhulme. Lord Beaverbrook, a Conservative press baron who had promised to support Lloyd George for five years, then became involved as a potential backer.

Since selling to a Conservative proprietor would be anathema, Donald tried to form a rival consortium to buy the paper. This failed but the dealings between him and Lloyd George were irretrievably tainted by underhand behaviour on the prime minister's side of the negotiations.

In 1918, events unexpectedly turned Lloyd George's way, albeit rather uncomfortably. He had assured Parliament on 9 April that the number of British troops facing the German onslaught in March had not been reduced. Frederick Maurice, the general in charge of statistics on the Western Front, was greatly concerned by the inaccuracy of this statement. He wrote to the new Chief of Staff asking whether it should not be exposed, but received no reply. After some days examining his conscience, he decided to write a letter to all the major newspapers.

Four of them published the letter on 7 May. Maurice was forced to resign and Parliament debated the matter on 9 May. Lloyd George won the vote, partly by counterattacking Maurice's figures but largely because there was no obvious successor and the war was at too sensitive a point to risk a governmental crisis. The Chronicle reported the debate factually.

However, a few days later, it recruited Maurice as its military correspondent. This move infuriated the prime minister. Lloyd George was now determined to buy the paper and set about raising the finance from friends of the party and by selling peerages. Beaverbrook was excluded, as were the Berry brothers of Allied Newspapers. The prime mover was Sir Henry Dalziel who already owned Reynold's News. He was rewarded by a knighthood in 1918 and a peerage in 1921.

Wartime inflation had lifted Frank Lloyd's price from £900,000 to £1.1m. In the end, Lloyd George paid £1.6m – probably for a quick sale. He was already planning the early general election that was announced immediately after the Armistice (he won).

Donald and the Chronicle knew nothing of these negotiations. He and Maurice heard a rumour on 3 October 1918 and Frank Lloyd confirmed the following day that the sale had gone through. A new regime was due to come into effect at 6 p.m on 5 October. Both men were obliged to resign.

Later years
The new editor was Ernest Perris, formerly the news editor. Some suspected him of having been complicit in Lloyd George's negotiations. He was the source of the rumour passed on to Donald and Maurice, but this does not indicate whether he was the messenger or equally taken by surprise. He also became editor of Lloyd's Weekly in 1924.

Whatever the loss of independence did to the Chronicle's credibility, its sales did not suffer under the new management. The editorial staff were not unduly interfered with, it seems. Rather, the paper suffered at the hands of corporate finance.

After Lloyd George ceased to be prime minister in 1922, he remained active in politics for the rest of the 1920s. His fall from power marked the end of the Liberal Party as a majority government but that was not apparent at the time. He needed money to back candidates but this time his idea of selling honours was thwarted by the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.

He had a valuable asset in the form of United Newspapers, owner of the Chronicle and other Lloyd publishing interests. He had bought off his fellow investors in 1922 and 1926, presumably at the 1918 valuation or thereabouts. He was sole owner in the sale contract. The question of whether the party should not benefit too caused some controversy at the time.

On 11 July 1927, Lloyd George sold the company to three investors who were rich but lacking experience of publishing, let alone newspapers. They paid him £2.9m. On 17 July 1928, a year and a week later, the three sold the company for £1.5m.

The first of these sales contained a curious clause that preserved Lloyd George's editorial control without responsibility for its liabilities. He was granted a 10-year option to buy back the shares if the Chronicle or Lloyd’s Weekly failed to follow progressive Liberal policies or promoted reactionary or communist views.

This was endorsed by the next owner despite his allegiance to the Conservative Party. He was William Harrison, an entrepreneur who had acquired a number of magazines and provincial newspapers. He had also gone into paper-making through Inveresk Paper Co and that now owned the former Lloyd newspapers. In the 1929 crash, Inveresk's share price fell 80%.

Harrison left the scene. An audit then showed that the Chronicle owed £3m in debt and commitments, had no cash and was suffering a marked loss of sales. It looked doomed. However, News and Westminster Ltd, a Cadbury company, offered to take the Chronicle on and merge it into the Daily News to create the News Chronicle. Their sales would combine to make 1,400,000, which seemed to offer a viable future. It was not a merger of equals, however, and the loss of jobs was borne by the Chronicle.

The News Chronicle prospered until 1956 when its opposition to the UK's involvement in the Suez crisis caused it to lose readers. Again facing closure, the only offer of help came from Associated Newspapers whose Daily Mail had been the Chronicle's adversary since its launch in 1896.

Associated took an option to buy the company if it did not return to profit. When it failed to do that by the summer of 1960, Associated took over the News Chronicle's plant, property and goodwill. The paper disappeared and, with it, the last vestiges of the Daily Chronicle.

Editors

 * 1872: J. A. Manson
 * 1877: R. Whelan Boyle
 * 1890: Alfred Ewen Fletcher
 * 1895: Henry William Massingham
 * 1899: W. J. Fisher
 * 1904: Robert Donald
 * 1918: Ernest Perris

title: Daily Chronicle


text:
Talk:Francis Fukuyama

Untitled
Is this correct?

 * In the latter, he retracts his original "end of history" thesis, arguing that since :biotechnology increasingly allows humans to control their own evolution, it may allow :humans to become fundamentally unequal, and thus spell the end of liberal democracy as a :workable system.

I have just read a newspaper article by Fukuyama himself, on world politics in the aftermath of 9/11, whose headline states

 * Radical Islam can't beat democracy and capitalism. We're still at the end of history

Check it out

 * And that is still sophomoric nonsense, as I said at the time.

Fukuyama has never retracted his 'End Of History' thesis. I altered the reference to state 'qualified'. (BScotland).
 * he has now however qualified his thesis that "modernization" was inevitable as opposed to democratization. see his recent nytimes article.

 * His 'thesis' has always been utter counterfactual nonsense, as any moderately intelligent and well-informed 16-year old could have told him at the time (and as I did say at the time).

Birthdate  1952 or 1955..which is it?

He recommended removal of Saddam Hussein to President G. W Bush also
"But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq...American military force should be used to provide a "safe zone" in Iraq from which the opposition can operate. And American forces must be prepared to back up our commitment to the Iraqi opposition by all necessary means."

Francis Fukuyama et al., September 20, 2001

http://www.newamericancentury.org/Bushletter.htm

This is ommitted in the original article that he recommended removal of Saddam Hussein to President G. W Bush also.

 * It seems notable to me, so I've added it, with the PNAC link cited by the above anon comment. JamesMLane t c 05:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

 * so he argued for the death of 75,00 iraqis to meet this specious goal and allwow iran to gain foothold. such idiocy

Fukuyama's views on neoconservatism
This sentence is POV: "Politically, Fukuyama has in the past been considered neoconservative." What did he do to break ranks with the other neoconservatives? How do we know he no longer is (or is no longer considered) a neoconservative?

It's not easily citable, but he gave a lecture series last year in which he explained that his own beliefs hadn't changed; rather that the popular understanding of "neoconservative" had changed around them, so that it applied to men like Wolfowitz who focus (in his view) far too much on hard-power unilateralism. (Of course, the popular understanding of the term "neoconservative" is very fuzzy anyway, which is another part of the problem.)

 * Our article has a direct quotation from him about his break with neoconservatism: "Neoconservatism, as both a political symbol and a body of thought, has evolved into something I can no longer support." That's from his New York Times Magazine essay.  The essaye says it's adapted from his book America at the Crossroads, which according to Amazon hasn't been released yet, but I assume it will be out soon.  When it is we can cite the quotation to the book. JamesMLane t c 00:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

 * A recent article in the NY Times also mentions Fukuyama's departure from the neoconservative movement, citing Fukuyama's opposition to the Iraq invasion of 2003 and his call for Rumsfeld to resign as examples. The link:  ( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/books/review/26berman.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1 ).--24.16.234.149 08:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

How do we know? The question this article struck in my mind is: how did this guy ever come to be mistaken for a neocon in the first place? The paraphrase of his politics reads like a neocon anathema: "realistic Wilsonianism"? "military intervention only as a last resort"? "stimulate political and economic development"? "gain a better understanding of what happens in other countries"??? "setting a good example"? "providing education and money"? "the US is good at the formation of international institutions"? Pardon my POV, but unless he had one whiplash jackknife of a conversion, the man described in that paragraph could never have been a neocon. Perhaps someone could amend the article to describe his earlier political bearings. As a liberal myself, I always liked to think of Fukuyama as a conservative I could admire. I'm almost sorry to find that he's one of us!CCJolliffe 01:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps your understanding of the term Neoconservative needs some work. In either case neoconservative like any other name refers to a group where there may be substantial disagreements. And as far as whether he was a neocon, I am willing to take his claim to having been one as sufficient. Finally, the description of Fukuyama's politics you claim reads like a neocon anethema, shows that your understanding of the term definitely needs some work: The paraphrase of his politics reads like a neocon anathema: "realistic Wilsonianism"? "military intervention only as a last resort"? "stimulate political and economic development"? "gain a better understanding of what happens in other countries"??? "setting a good example"? "providing education and money"? "the US is good at the formation of international institutions"? This is not substantially different from what can be found in Joshua Muravchik's Tome EXPORTING DEMOCRACY:FULFILLING AMERICA'S DESTINY. To be sure, "realistic Wilsonianism" seems to belong to his "postneocon" ideas. You cite "military intervention only as a last resort" as something laudabile, but can we concretely identify what that means: Can an incomming president simply pick up where his predecessor left off or must he start from scratch? Should every imaginable deal be struck first or Should we be able to realize at some point that no amount of deal making would bring us closer to our goals? In the case of Iraq, after 12 years, 16 U.N resolutions(enough resolutions to justify American action in Kosovo)and numerous side deals, What was left to try ( particularly, in view of the harrasment Blix cited and the STILL incomplete Full and Final disclosures- we were at the 7th or eighth installment of these-) At what point does the U.N's promise of "grave and serious consequences" become more than a punch line? Spiker 22 (talk) 03:14, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I've very disrespectfully renamed this topic "Fukuyama's views on neoconservatism" just to prevent a proliferation of debate topics & because this one seemed fit to discuss what I wanted to discuss(it was first named "POV: Still a neoconservative. No?"). This article on Newsweek came out on 10 april, here Fukuyama claims that in 2004 he really parted with neoconservatism http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/10/the-beginning-of-history.html. I think it's worth mentioning so I will try to elegantly knit this into the paragraph about neoconservatism.--Tomvasseur (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC) Ok I replaced "He said that he would vote against Bush in the 2004 election,[13] and that the Bush administration had made three major mistakes:" with "In 2004, the year in which Fukuyama broke with the neoconservative movement[3], he said that he would vote against Bush,[4] and that the Bush administration had made three major mistakes:"--Tomvasseur (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The page current says his views on neoconservatism and the Iraq war began to change in late-2003, but it cites two sources from mid-2004. That timeline is important, as the former implies he was an early(ish) opponent to the Iraq war, while in the latter case he would be altering his opinion at the same time as events on the ground began to go pear-shaped. I edited to reflect the difference.

Opening Line
reads: Fukuyama is best known as the author of the silly, adolescent, ignorant nonsense generally known as The End of History and the Last Man

This seems blatantly biased yet it hasn't been addressed by anyone here, am I missing something?

 * It was vandalism from an anon, quickly reverted. Next time you see stuff like that, be bold and delete it. JamesMLane t c 09:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

"The End of History" is one of the most stupid ideas of the 20th century. It's right up there with the Maginot line as really imbecilic ideas. I appreciate that this is POV but it's also true. SmokeyTheFatCat 16:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

No doubt smokey the fat cat hasn't bothered to learn exactly what Fukuyama meant by the phrase "The End of History"

~ Spiker_22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.1.37 (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Support of Libby
This statement attribution motivation to Fukuyama needs a source or citation: "FF has said he is on Mr. Libby's steering committee out of loyalty, not support for the policies of the Bush administration or Libby." Where, when, and to whom did Fukuyama say this? Has he said this in public? If not, it probably should not be included here. (E.g., he might have said it to you, or to a student of his, to get mollify them, even though it weren't true.)

Question
Why does he come off sounding just like another Chicken Hawk who enjoys sending younger men to their deaths? - Sparky 01:41, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

 * because he is - his family cowardice is documented

From this comment one can understand the appeal comic books hav for you. Too bad you can't think beyond comic book reality. ~ Spiker_22 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.1.37 (talk) 11:47, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

 * While I don't necessarily disagree with your characterization, the guiding principle of Wikipedia is to present objective information in the manner of a print encyclopedia, not political opinion or editorial analysis. By the same token, discussion pages for Wikipedia articles are not forums for discussing what you may personally think of a public figure but rather what can be done to improve articles to meet a high standard of objectivity. Inoculatedcities 05:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Influence outside U.S.
Someone or someone(s) today added a section for "Influence outside U.S." At first I thought it was an interesting addition, but needed some citation, and I meant to flag it so. However, looking through the series of edits that created the section, it was clearly created by someone with a clear anti-Fukuyama axe to grind; as such my doubt was such that I simply deleted the section. I would not be surprised if he was controversial outside the U.S., and I would like to see someone add some information. Certainly it would not be too hard to provide a few links to the article if he is actually talked about. But editors adding phrases like "In short, Fukuyama is not taken seriously" are themselves not going to be taken seriously. 171.159.64.10 02:08, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with your impulse to get rid of that section. I do think it is in fact accurate to say that he is not taken seriously as a scholar or philosopher by many reputable intellectuals (especially, for example, those familiar with Hegel and Kojeve, many of whom cringe at the description of FF's End of History and the Last Man as "Hegelian").  But we shouldn't put such claims here without them being sourced, and we certainly should not word them in the way the passage you deleted was worded.--csloat 02:56, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Ethnicity

 * I'm not sure, but it seems like it would be pronounced "FOO-ki-yahmuh". And linking alcoholism with Irish ancestry doesn't seem to remotely resemble an NPOV standard, to me. I do hope you are joking. Aaрон Кинни  (t) 02:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Is this a political forum or an encyclopedia? --2606:A000:1228:4033:A9C8:232E:7E2B:261F (talk) 20:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Hegel
Since Hegel is frequently mentioned in Fukuyama's writings, it is fair to ask if he accepts the teaching of Absolute Idealism. Is Fukuyama just dropping a name to appear intellectually cultivated? Does he endorse Hegel's writing style, with its compulsive obscurity and use of neologisms? Does Fichte's triadic process of dialectic make sense to him? Does he believe in the divine Absolute?Lestrade 18:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

Lestrade Are you serious or just trying to stir the pot. If you're trying to stir the pot, you lost the spoon awhile ago. Not sure why one would need to ask about absolute idealism, since Fukuyama does not mention it himself in his works. If he endorsed Hegel's writing style, wouldn't it stand to reason that he would write in this way?. Not sure what "Fichte's triadic process of dialectic" has to do with either Hegel or Fukuyama, but One wonders whether such assertions are designed to make the commentator appear intellectually cultivated. Just as naming oneself, Lestrade is supposed to suggest literary cultivation or at least a large ego(Arthur Conan Doyle rolls over in his grave). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.1.37 (talk) 11:59, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I was just wondering about the extent of Hegel's influence on Fukuyama, if any. Isn't that permissible? Nice try at psychologizing, though.Lestrade (talk) 13:32, 12 February 2009 (UTC)Lestrade
 * It seems that Fukuyama follows Hegel in that he assumes that there is a directional movement or purpose to history. Hegel claimed that the Absolute Spirit (The God Reason) ordained an end toward which history develops. Fukuyama appears to agree.Lestrade (talk) 22:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

Question out of curiosity
Why does the quote that states "[W]ar is the wrong metaphor..." have the "w" in brackets? Don't the brackets denote a logical alteration to the quote by the person quoting the source? If the "w" was not there, then what took its place? I am not saying that whoever added that quote is wrong because a search on google turned up many results fashioned the same way. I am just curious. Thanks a lot. Wikipediarul e s 2221 01:37, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * This commonly is used when the original sentence was something like "I argue that war is the wrong metaphor"; in the original the "W" was lower-case.--csloat 05:52, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, okay; I got it now. Thanks a lot for your response.  Happy editing!  Wikipediarul e s 2221  05:53, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Link to Video Interview with Francis Fukuyama
Hello. I have a query. In the past, I have posted a link to an exclusive video interview with Professor Francis Fukuyama and it has now been removed because, according to the person who removed it, it was considered spam. In fact, the link was posted to enrich and enhance the quality of the article as a whole by providing new and relevant information. Never was my posting of this link done with the intention to create spam or any other malignant activity. It is a pity that readers of wikipedia can no longer take advantage of this video interview, which, I think (and you may judge for yourself by clicking here: http://www.thetalent.org/Video/frm-main.php?show=19&quality=stop) is an important source of knowledge for those interested in his work. Would the readers of this talkpage and whoever who has the authority to remove links please let me know whether they agree to add this link or whether they consider it of no interest to the article in question? Taleinfo 11:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Taleinfo (talk • contribs) 11:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC).
 * Just look at other links, there is for example 3 hour C-Span interview, I doubt your extremely short interview can really add anything.--Pethr 17:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Iraq War
Can anybody provide evidence that Fukuyama opposed the Iraq war prior to its apparent failure? Ivangeotsky
 * Is Wikipedia joining other media in making it seem apparent that the war has failed? This united strategy worked 35 years ago and handed victory to the Viet Cong. Can it work today and hand victory to al-Qaeda?72.73.195.87 02:11, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Warren Rabbit

Holy bias, Batman! Leaving aside the question of whether victory is still possible, the question remains: Is there any indication that Fukuyama opposed the Iraq war prior to its apparent failure (i.e. the fact that the war was not the "cakewalk" that had been predicted by neo-cons)? Ivangeotsky

Criticism
Why is there no criticism of this idiot? He's a neocon for fucks sakes, a bunch of small minded parasites who've killed a lot of people so Cheney can get rich. His "ideas" are a result of parochial american simplifications and have been shown to be rubbish. He's as visionary as the guy who wanted to close the patent office in the 1800s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.161.187 (talk) 23:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that there should be more criticism but somehow I doubt you should be the one to do it. --Jayson Virissimo 05:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

 * o h so it should be wiki editors who do not like truth?

Criticism usually comes from someone who knows what they are talking about. 83.70.161.187 knows how to be vitriolic but can't raise his head above ad hominem. One can certainly disagree with a neoconservative, but that entails knowing what their ideas are in the first place. Typical liberal confuses differences of opinion with questions of character. Definitely the hallmark of the fanatic who pays lipservice to things like tolerance and diversity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.33.1.37 (talk) 12:14, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but isn't your use of "typical liberal" also ad hominem? There's nothing "typically liberal" about it. It is an illiberal attitude unfortunately found among ignorant fools (sorry my ad hom there) on all parts of the political spectrum. Personally I'd have thought it as common on the reactionary Right, but there you go. 89.243.149.180 (talk) 10:00, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Yep, I guess I'm also a vitriolic fanatic ignorant fool who tries to pay more than lipservice to things like tolerance and diversity and yet sometimes resorts to ad hominem attacks, but anyway, I thought it might be important to point out that Fukuyama is also a bioconservative on bioethical issues, making him oddly enough a bedfellow with some Greens like Bill McKibben. When questioned (in a debate with a transhumanist?) if he believed government should have the right to order people to die, Fukuyama said yes. Shanoman (talk) 06:46, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Recent critical article on free-market economics
He appears to have radically revised his views in this article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/162401?from=rss

Perhaps an update is in order? 89.243.149.180 (talk) 14:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Difficult to say – is this a radical revision: "Financial institutions need strong supervision, but it isn't clear that other sectors of the economy do. Free trade remains a powerful motor for economic growth, as well as an instrument of U.S. diplomacy."? I added a bit to the article. Just be bold and change the article yourself if you think a bigger update is in order. Thanks anyway for the link! --Cyfal (talk) 12:07, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Info box
Is the info box standard? Does not seem to match that of other authors. I find it odd that it lists parents under family, but spouse and children are listed at the end of the actual entry. Should those be moved to the info box? Destroyer71 (talk) 14:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Home-made surveillance drones
Via Slashdot, I see the Prof F has built a surveillance drone — that is, attached a camera to a radio-controlled model aircraft. Video here. Would this be worth mentioning in the article? CWC 12:29, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Balanced Biography: Fukayama's interest outside of "The End of History"
Fukayama's biography here, on the whole, makes a common mistake. Often a scholar becomes notable because of a few works focusing on a particular issue. That scholar then becomes heavily associated with that issue. As a result, biographers and biographies tend to be highly focused on the scholar's writings that concern the fame-making issue while also being almost blind and deaf to other issues that the scholar has focused on, and that, importantly, provide a broader and more thorough, rounded out perspective on that scholar's thought. A major flaw in the current biography of Francis Fukayama (as of 5/25/12) is the lack of emphasis on the abundant research and policy work he has done regarding biotechnology. He has done so much research exploring and grappling with the future prospects of biotechnology, the potential for problems, the need for and the limits of informed regulation, that he has become one of the most cited scholars of the subject. (Note how this makes Fukayama a "thoughtful conservative" rather than a knee-jerk conservative who rejects nearly any and every form of regulation of free enterprise.)

But in the current biography, he continues to be associated with one of his most controversial works (The End of History, and follow-ups), a work that doesn't accurately reflect the bulk of his research or his research emphases. Worse, it does not give him credit or kudos for his most thorough and scholarly works, the works for which he is most respected among scholars.

In sum, this biography needs to be updated so that Fukayama is not pidgeon-holed as primarily the author of The End of History. Much more emphasis needs to be placed on his other more sustained areas of focus and impact -- namely his work concerning the consequences of advanced biotechnology.

[References are available on request, but authors of the biography should know how to check the statements above, and further discussion should be focused on Fukayama's full corpus of writings, not the few for which he gained notoriety in the broader public. His corpus can easily be found by looking for his c.v. 174.16.177.68 (talk) 05:45, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Original The End of History?
I thought that Fukuyama became well known to the general public by the idea of the end of history his 1989 article “The End of History?” in The National Interest. (Not that so many people actually read The National Interest, but it was largely publicized in the newspapers.) I am surprised that this 1989 article in not even mentioned, but only a later book of 1992. --Dominique Meeùs (talk) 10:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Have you got a good source (or two or three)? bobrayner (talk) 10:53, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Is Liberal Democracy the end of struggle to find the final shape of 'global order' ?
The larger narrative of 'nature' versus 'nurture' is ignored if we take into consideration only the 'ideological' struggle.

The 'ideological' way of looking at development of models of human self governance has been devising methods of minimising or even eliminating 'inequality' through human agency.

Mankind devised two institutional paradigms for achieving this objective- Religions-which promised equality in the other world and tried to minimise inequality in this world. and Political Parties- which set in motion an agenda of competitive visions geared towards delivering common and equal benefits to all in this world.

Practice has seen both of these to degenerate into sectarian movements and actively discriminating in an 'inclusive-exclusive' pattern.

At the other end of the spectrum was the acceptance of 'Nature' that 'we are all born unequal, live unequal lives and have unequal impact on the world'.

An institutionalised expression of this acceptance has been in Caste System of India. The critical differentiator that Caste System had was of 'an idea of hierarchy' at its core.

The Caste System has been an extremely resilient and surprisingly a very adaptable system and has been the most 'stable' system having subsumed every other variety of governance systems in the growth and history of the Indian Society in the 'global village' called Indian Subcontinent.

Structure of the Indian Society as model: The structure of Indian society, with its’ framework of rigid, ‘caste’ based, hierarchical society, counterbalanced by the religious philosophy of an unchanging and inclusive “Sanatan Dharma (Hindu)” religion, provides the answer to the search for shape of society in future. These twin institutions helped Indian people stay together practically unchanged through thousands of years of multicultural coexistence. Caste System is the ‘natural’ development model of a multicultural,pluralistic, economically multi layered social order. ‘Sanatan Dharma’, the permanent unchanging, all encompassing,ever tolerant, very understanding religion as the ‘International Religion’ is an essential corollary to Caste System and its essential partner in such a society. It is further submitted that: As the world integrates into a ‘Global Village’ and a common worldwide ‘Global Village Society’, Caste System is the (probably) inevitable structure of the society of future. It shall allow every social grouping its demarcated place under the sun. In its own way it shall render many of the current dilemmas meaningless. Rigidity of caste is provided an effective counterbalance by eclectism of Sanatan Dharma. This uniquely balanced system is self sustaining and stable. Any excess of one generates a counter response from the other. Balance is thus restored. However, like any institution, the fatal flaw of getting hijacked by vested interests and getting ossified too shall be present; therefore the warts of such an order shall also be there –in full strength. So the End of History scenario would be remarkably different from what is visualised by Fukuyama and others. Atulatulchandra (talk) 11:44, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

"Japanese ancestry"
I removed this phrase. It's ridiculous to make reference to his ethnicity in the opening line of the entry. Would you expect to see the entry on JFK to begin: "35th President of the United States, of Irish Catholic ancestry" ? That's dumb, and I think to see it in Fukuyama's entry sort of smacks of a subconcious racist tendency in whoever wrote it. A thinker's ethnicity should seldom be so important as to demand reference in the opening line (unless it is specifically connected to his work)

Why is the source of the above comment unidentified? In any case, the comment is exactly correct. Furthermore, his Japanese ancestry can be seen immediately from his name --- just as Kennedy's can be seen from his. ---Dagme (talk) 16:51, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I am unsure why, but on the back of the Danish edition of the End of History, it says (translated & parahrased as I don't have it by me) "Francis Fukuyama is a (Japanese) economist." Mikkel 03:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Since the man's origins are Japanese, why not say so? Kennedy made a point of his Irish origins. Via his famous father you can find the family's exact origins. Nothing for Fukuyama.
 * I'm pretty sure that between Fukuyama's name and photo at the top of the article his ethnicity is obvious to anyone who recognizes Japanese surnames, and nothing more need be said. The fact that he is American (and he very much is) is roughly 10,000 times more relevant to understanding his both his work and his influence. As for "origins that must make them insecure within US society", what, do you think all of us non-WASP Americans live in fear?

It's remarkable how many of the NeoCons have origins that must make them insecure within US society. And that they never discuss it, or not that I've seen.

Significant numbers of Japanese Americans were locked up during World War Two. A point to follow up, maybe. --GwydionM 19:03, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * So were many Germans and Italians! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.161.66.236 (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Better to say many Germans during the first World War. Anyway, I have started to remove ethnicity from every infobox I see and I have done it so far for a handful of people and I will also do it for Fukuyama. Please for more information see these two links:Bobby Jindal: Ethinicity and Infobox Question -- An d Re w 05:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dagme (talk • contribs)

In the years since this was discussed the phrase has been re-added. I'm going to remove it, it's not relevant and could easily be seen as demeaning. JayBeckerNCL (talk) 08:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Japanese name in kanji in lede
I have no particular opinion about whether that name belongs there or not, but if it is to be included it needs a source. There are dozens of different ways to write the name Yoshihiro in Japanese, and I can't find any evidence on Google that Francis Fukuyama uses this particular one, and it isn't mentioned on Japanese Wikipedia either. I marked it as citation needed for now, but it should be removed if no sources are forthcoming. 58.176.246.42 (talk) 07:35, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I'm the same editor who made the above comment. It's been nearly two months and no source for those kanji has been provided, nor are any readily apparent from Google or Google Books. There's no reason to think the kanji given are actually correct (as opposed to any of the other dozens of ways to write the name seen at Yoshihiro). Finally, I fail to see why the kanji are relevant enough for the lede since, as the "Early life" section states, Fukuyama "had little contact with Japanese culture, and did not learn Japanese".

 * The arguments above by other editors for not mentioning in the lede that Fukuyama is Japanese American apply a fortiori to these unsourced kanji. The IP who added the kanji (50.35.84.247) is long gone, and User:Polmandc already removed the kanji once (diff). So I'm removing this name again. If anyone sees a good reason why the kanji should be included and you have an actual source for them, please discuss here. Regards, 210.6.254.106 (talk) 04:41, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Francis Fukuyama. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.ned.org/research/research-council/francis-fukuyama

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

9-11 discrediting of thesis
No mention of the impact of 9-11 here, although it was the resurgence of Islamic ideology more than any other factor which shot down Fukuyama's main thesis. This is, be it noted, discussed in the Wiki article on the essay itself. Orthotox (talk) 20:01, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Francis Fukuyama. 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/20070610221956/http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/pols3017/Recent%20Articles/The%20Neoconservative%20Moment%20Fukuyama.pdf to http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/pols3017/Recent%20Articles/The%20Neoconservative%20Moment%20Fukuyama.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610221956/http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/pols3017/Recent%20Articles/The%20Neoconservative%20Moment%20Fukuyama.pdf to http://arts.anu.edu.au/sss/pols3017/Recent%20Articles/The%20Neoconservative%20Moment%20Fukuyama.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101227091634/http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=906 to http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=906

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) 13:24, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Views on Neoconservativism
This reads as a really strange article in that it manages to portray Fukuyama in a bad light whilst apparently avoiding drawing attention to this or including any criticism. It outlines in a nice list his reasons for distancing himself from Neoconservativism without acknowledging that earlier in the article he is depicted as advocating for the ideas he later condemned, most notably in his support for the Iraq invasion and defence of the US's unilateral approach. A less lenient interpretation would be that he changed his mind once his ideas turned out to be bad ones. He might have said as much himself for all I know, but there is no suggestion of this in the article, or any evidence of the criticism his views on the topic have attracted over the years. 80.3.80.47 (talk) 20:34, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

the photo caption: "Fukuyama in 2015" (Wrong)
Hi,

By "Wrong" I don't mean that the picture wasn't taken in 2015. Sure it was. What is wrong, however, is that this date is "stamped" on this portrait.

I suggest, this is a "tabloid" approach. He looks great! Yeah, but look at the date!

We should see a new pic, an up-to-date -- "updated" one...

This is wrong.

It should be: "Francis Fukuyama", or not even that...

In "alt tag" of the image in the HTML code, sure, the person's name is due to appear. But in a Wikipedia Article's head it should be evident.

But either way, a portrait is universal. It depicts a person. A forensic pic is a different matter. Wikipedia should keep away from becoming a forensic pool.

The date of the picture should appear among the image's details.

That someone will not bother to even click on it, is their fault. Culture is not for everyone. Culture means people making effort to join it, not an amusement park for consumers.

But beyond general considerations, there's no contextual "need" to be informed in which year the portrait was taken. That part belongs to his privacy. Talking about how well or how badly people are aging should be left for stupid websites, not Wikipedia. Wikipedia should keep to culture.

Shouldn't it? :)

--peter.josvai (talk) 05:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Francis Fukuyama