text:
Balassa–Samuelson effect

The Balassa–Samuelson effect, also known as Harrod–Balassa–Samuelson effect (Kravis and Lipsey 1983), the Ricardo–Viner–Harrod–Balassa–Samuelson–Penn–Bhagwati effect (Samuelson 1994, p. 201), or productivity biased purchasing power parity (PPP) (Officer 1976) is the tendency for consumer prices to be systematically higher in more developed countries than in less developed countries. This observation about the systematic differences in consumer prices is called the "Penn effect". The Balassa–Samuelson hypothesis is the proposition that this can be explained by the greater variation in productivity between developed and less developed countries in the traded goods' sectors which in turn affects wages and prices in the non-tradable goods sectors.

Béla Balassa and Paul Samuelson independently proposed the causal mechanism for the Penn effect in the early 1960s.

The theory
The Balassa–Samuelson effect depends on inter-country differences in the relative productivity of the tradable and non-tradable sectors.

The empirical “Penn Effect”
By the law of one price, entirely tradable goods cannot vary greatly in price by location (because buyers can source from the lowest cost location). However most services must be delivered locally (e.g. hairdressing), and many manufactured goods such as furniture have high transportation costs (or, conversely, low value-to-weight or low value-to-bulk ratios), which makes deviations from the law of one price (known as purchasing power parity or PPP-deviations) persistent. The Penn effect is that PPP-deviations usually occur in the same direction: where incomes are high, average price levels are typically high.

Basic form of the effect
The simplest model which generates a Balassa–Samuelson effect has two countries, two goods (one tradable, and a country specific nontradable) and one factor of production, labor. For simplicity assume that productivity, as measured by marginal product (in terms of goods produced) of labor, in the nontradable sector is equal between countries and normalized to one.

$$MPL_{nt,1}=MPL_{nt,2}=1$$

where "nt" denotes the nontradable sector and 1 and 2 indexes the two countries.

In each country, under the assumption of competition in the labor market the wage ends up being equal to the value of the marginal product, or the sector's price times MPL. (Note that this is not necessary, just sufficient, to produce the Penn effect. What is needed is that wages are at least related to productivity.)

$$w_1=p_{nt,1}*MPL_{nt,1}=p_{t}*MPL_{t,1}$$

$$w_2=p_{nt,2}*MPL_{nt,2}=p_{t}*MPL_{t,2}$$

Where the subscript "t" denotes the tradables sector. Note that the lack of a country specific subscript on the price of tradables means that tradable goods prices are equalized between the two countries.

Suppose that country 2 is the more productive, and hence, the wealthier one. This means that

$$MPL_{t,1}<MPL_{t,2}$$

which implies that

$$p_{nt,1}<p_{nt,2}$$.

So with a same (world) price for tradable goods, the price of nontradable goods will be lower in the less productive country, resulting in an overall lower price level.

The effect in more detail
A typical discussion of this argument would include the following features:
 * Workers in some countries have higher productivity than in others. This is the ultimate source of the income differential. (Also expressed as productivity growth.)
 * Certain labour-intensive jobs are less responsive to productivity innovations than others. For instance, a highly skilled Zürich burger flipper is no more productive than his Moscow counterpart (in burger/hour) but these jobs are services which must be performed locally.
 * The fixed-productivity sectors are also the ones producing non-transportable goods (for instance haircuts) – this must be the case or the labour intensive work would have been off-shored.
 * To equalize local wage levels with the (highly productive) Zürich engineers, Zürich fast food employees must be paid more than Moscow fast food employees, even though the burger production rate per employee is an international constant.
 * The CPI is made up of:
 * local goods (which in richer countries are more expensive relative to tradables)
 * Tradables, which have the same price everywhere
 * The (real) exchange rate is pegged (by the law of one price) so that tradable goods follow PPP (purchasing power parity). The assumption that PPP holds only for tradable goods is testable.
 * Since money exchange rates will vary fully with tradable goods productivity, but average productivity varies to a lesser extent, the (real goods) productivity differential is less than the productivity differential in money terms.
 * Productivity becomes income, so the real income varies less than the money income does.
 * This is equivalent to saying that the money exchange rate exaggerates the real income, or that the price level is higher in more productive, richer, economies.

Equivalent Balassa–Samuelson effect within a country
The average asking price for a house in a prosperous city can be ten times that of an identical house in a depressed area of the same country. Therefore, the RER-deviation exists independent of what happens to the nominal exchange rate (which is always 1 for areas sharing the same currency). Looking at the price level distribution within a country gives a clearer picture of the effect, because this removes three complicating factors:
 * 1) The econometrics of purchasing power parity (PPP) tests are complicated by nominal exchange rate noise. (This noise would be an econometric problem, even assuming that the exchange rate volatility is a pure error term).
 * 2) There may be some real economy border effects between countries which limit the flow of tradables or people.
 * 3) Monetary effects, and exchange rate movements can affect the real economy and complicate the picture, a problem eliminated if comparing regions that use the same currency unit.
 * 4) Taxes are very different in many countries, whereas in a same country taxes are usually equal or similar.

A pint of pub beer is famously more expensive in the south of England than the north, but supermarket beer prices are very similar. This may be treated as anecdotal evidence in favour of the Balassa–Samuelson hypothesis, since supermarket beer is an easily transportable, traded good. (Although pub beer is transportable, the pub itself is not.) The BS-hypothesis explanation for the price differentials is that the 'productivity' of pub employees (in pints served per hour) is more uniform than the 'productivity' (in foreign currency earned per year) of people working in the dominant tradable sector in each region of the country (financial services in the south of England, manufacturing in the north). Although the employees of southern pubs are not significantly more productive than their counterparts in the north, southern pubs must pay wages comparable to those offered by other southern firms in order to keep their staff. This results in southern pubs incurring a higher labour cost per pint served.

Empirical evidence on the Balassa–Samuelson effect
Evidence for the Penn effect is well established in today's world (and is readily observable when traveling internationally). However, the Balassa–Samuelson (BS) hypothesis implies that countries with rapidly expanding economies should tend to have more rapidly appreciating exchange rates (for instance the Four Asian Tigers); conventional econometric tests yield mixed findings for this prediction.

In total, since it was (re)discovered in 1964, according to Tica and Druzic (2006) the HBS theory "has been tested 60 times in 98 countries in time series or panel analyses and in 142 countries in cross-country analyses. In these analyzed estimates, country specific HBS coefficients have been estimated 166 times in total, and at least once for 65 different countries". Many papers have been published since then. Bahmani-Oskooee and Abm (2005) & Egert, Halpern and McDonald (2006) also provide quite interesting surveys of empirical evidence on BS effect.

Over time, the testing of the HBS model has evolved quite dramatically. Panel data and time series techniques have crowded out old cross-section tests, demand side and terms of trade variables have emerged as explanatory variables, new econometric methodologies have replaced old ones, and recent improvements with endogenous tradability have provided direction for future researchers.

The sector approach combined with panel data analysis and/or cointegration has become a benchmark for empirical tests. Consensus has been reached on the testing of internal and external HBS effects (vis a vis a numeraire country) with a strong reservation against the purchasing power parity assumption in the tradable sector.

The vast majority of the evidence supports the HBS model. A deeper analysis of the empirical evidence shows that the strength of the results is strongly influenced by the nature of the tests and set of countries analyzed. Almost all cross-section tests confirm the model, while panel data results confirm the model for the majority of countries included in the tests. Although some negative results have been returned, there has been strong support for the predictions of a cointegration between relative productivity and relative prices within a country and between countries, while the interpretation of evidence for cointegration between real exchange rate and relative productivity has been much more controversial.

Therefore, most of the contemporary authors (e.g.: Egert, Halpern and McDonald (2006); Drine & Rault (2002)) analyze main BS assumptions separately:
 * 1) The differential of productivities between traded and non-traded sector and relative prices are positively correlated.
 * 2) The purchasing power parity assumption is verified for tradable goods.
 * 3) The RER and relative prices of non-tradable goods are positively correlated.
 * 4) As a consequence of 1, 2, & 3, there is a long-run relationship between productivity differentials and the RER.

Refinements to the econometric techniques and debate about alternative models are continuing in the International economics community. For instance:
 * "A possible explanation of the BS empirical rejection may simply be that there are additional long-run real exchange determinants that have to be considered." Drine & Rault conclude.

The next section lists some of the alternative proposals to an explanation of the Penn effect, but there are significant econometric problems with testing the BS-hypothesis, and the lack of strong evidence for it between modern economies may not refute it, or even imply that it produces a small effect. For instance, other effects of exchange rate movements might mask the long-term BS-hypothesis mechanism (making it harder to detect if it exists). Exchange rate movements are believed by some to affect productivity; if this is true then regressing RER movements on differential productivity growth will be 'polluted' by a totally different relationship between the variables1.

Alternative, and additional causes of the Penn effect
Most professional economists accept that the Balassa–Samuelson effect model has some merit. However other sources of the Penn effect RER/GDP relationship have been proposed:

The distribution sector
In a 2001 International Monetary Fund working paper Macdonald & Ricci accept that relative productivity changes produce PPP-deviations, but argue that this is not confined to tradables versus non-tradable sectors. Quoting the abstract: "an increase in the productivity and competitiveness of the distribution sector with respect to foreign countries leads to an appreciation of the real exchange rate, similarly to what a relative increase in the domestic productivity of tradables does".

The Dutch Disease
Capital inflows (say to the Netherlands) may stimulate currency appreciation through demand for money. As the RER appreciates, the competitiveness of the traded-goods sectors falls (in terms of the international price of traded goods).

In this model, there has been no change in real economy productivities, but money price productivity in traded goods has been exogenously lowered through currency appreciation. Since capital inflow is associated with high-income states (e.g. Monaco) this could explain part of the RER/Income correlation.

Yves Bourdet and Hans Falck have studied the effect of Cape Verde remittances on the traded-goods sector. They find that, as local incomes have risen with a doubling of remittances from abroad, the Cape Verde RER has appreciated 14% (during the 1990s). The export sector of the Cape Verde economy suffered a similar fall in productivity during the same period, which was caused entirely by capital flows and not by the BS-effect.

Services are a 'superior good'
Rudi Dornbusch (1998) and others say that income rises can change the ratio of demand for goods and services (tradable and non-tradable sectors). This is because services tend to be superior goods, which are consumed proportionately more heavily at higher incomes.

A shift in preferences at the microeconomic level, caused by an income effect can change the make-up of the consumer price index to include proportionately more expenditure on services. This alone may shift the consumer price index, and might make the non-trade sector look relatively less productive than it had been when demand was lower; if service quality (rather than quantity) follows diminishing returns to labour input, a general demand for a higher service quality automatically produces a reduction in per-capita productivity.

A typical labour market pattern is that high-GDP countries have a higher ratio of service-sector to traded-goods-sector employment than low-GDP countries. If the traded/non-traded consumption ratio is also correlated with the price level, the Penn effect would still be observed with labour productivity rising equally fast (in identical technologies) between countries.

The protectionism explanation
Lipsey and Swedenborg (1996) show a strong correlation between the barriers to Free trade and the domestic price level. If wealthy countries feel more able to protect their native producers than developing nations (e.g. with tariffs on agricultural imports) we should expect to see a correlation between rising GDP and rising prices (for goods in protected industries - especially food).

This explanation is similar to the BS-effect, since an industry needing protection must be measurably less productive in the world market of the commodity it produces. However, this reasoning is slightly different from the pure BS-hypothesis, because the goods being produced are 'traded-goods', even though protectionist measures mean that they are more expensive on the domestic market than the international market, so they will not be "traded" internationally

Trade theory implications
The supply-side economists (and others) have argued that raising International competitiveness through policies that promote traded goods sectors' productivity (at the expense of other sectors) will increase a nation's GDP, and increase its standard of living, when compared with treating the sectors equally. The Balassa–Samuelson effect might be one reason to oppose this trade theory, because it predicts that: a GDP gain in traded goods does not lead to as much of an improvement in the living standard as an equal GDP increase in the non-traded sector. (This is due to the effect's prediction that the CPI will increase by more in the former case.)

History
The Balassa–Samuelson effect model was developed independently in 1964 by Béla Balassa and Paul Samuelson. The effect had previously been hypothesized in the first edition of Roy Forbes Harrod's International Economics (1939, pp. 71–77), but this portion was not included in subsequent editions.

Partly because empirical findings have been mixed, and partly to differentiate the model from its conclusion, modern papers tend to refer to the Balassa–Samuelson hypothesis, rather than the Balassa–Samuelson effect. (See for instance: "A panel data analysis of the Balassa-Samuelson hypothesis", referred to above.)

title: Balassa–Samuelson effect


text:
User:ACW

Started using and contributing to Wikipedia in September, 2004. My interests include mathematics, linguistics, computers, general science, and some history.

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

title: User:ACW


text: User talk:67.181.220.63

title: User talk:67.181.220.63


text:
Category:Keweenaw County, Michigan

Articles related to Keweenaw County in the U.S. state of Michigan.

title: Category:Keweenaw County, Michigan


text:
User talk:Bobbis

Template:Stuyvesant High School infobox TfD combined
Since you already voted (and nominated!) in the above TfD, I wanted to let you know that I have just added Template:Stuyvesant High School infobox2 to this discussion. -Splash 01:37, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Voting in your nomination is the usual thing to do. I was just copying a standard message to the two people who had already voted, but added the (and nominated!) to yours since you had. Sometimes there is a little confusion over what a nominator what's done with a templat/article/whatever, so the request that you vote explicitly is supposed to avoid that. -Splash 19:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clearing that up. Bobbis 20:04, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Alvis-Vickers.png
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Alvis-Vickers.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 16:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:BAE SYSTEMS.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:BAE SYSTEMS.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

File:BAE SYSTEMS.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BAE SYSTEMS.png, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. — ξ xplicit  01:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bobbis


text: User talk:212.219.47.2

title: User talk:212.219.47.2


text:
Sylvia Lynd

Sylvia Lynd ( Dryhurst; 1888 – 21 February 1952) was an Anglo-Irish poet, essayist, short story writer and novelist. She was born in London but both of her parents, A.R. Dryhurst and her mother, the suffragist writer Nora Dryhurst ( Robinson) were Dubliners. Royal Academy of Dramatic Art. From 1904 to 1906, Lynd studied at the Slade School of Fine Art, later moving on to the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts. Around this time, she was associated with the Inghinidhe na hÉireann, an Irish nationalist women’s organisation. In 1908, a monthly magazine was produced, Bean na hÉireann, which sought to discuss topics such as politics, the vote for women, language, and labour issues. Lynd edited the first issue before returning to England and Helena Molony took it over.

In 1909, she married a journalist and man of letters, Robert Wilson Lynd, whom she had met at the London Gaelic League four years earlier. Born in Belfast to a Presbyterian minister, Robert Lynd wrote for The Northern Whig and later became a literary editor for the Daily News (later known as News Chronicle) and a columnist for New Statesman. They lived in Hampstead, London for many years and had two daughters, Máire (who was to marry Jack Gaster) and Sigle. Sylvia Dryhurst Lynd died in 1952, aged 63.

Works

 * The Chorus (1916) novel
 * The Thrush and the Jay (1916) Constable, essays and poems
 * The Goldfinches (1920) poems
 * The Swallowdive (1921) novel
 * The Mulberry Bush (1925) short stories
 * The Yellow Placard (1931), Gollancz, poems
 * The Christmas Omnibus (1932), Gollancz (editor)
 * The Enemies (1934), Dent, poems
 * English Children (1942), Britain in Pictures series, William Collins
 * Selected Poems of Sylvia Lynd (1945), Macmillan

title: Sylvia Lynd


text:
User talk:Mattdm

Rabatment
I put your new article rabatment of the rectangle into the hopper at "Did you know?", FYI. In a few weeks or so, a brief hook about the article will appear on the Main page. Cheers! Binksternet (talk) 20:03, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Cool, thanks! I somehow got obsessed about all of this, so it's nice to see it providing a wider benefit to other people. Matthew Miller (talk) 21:27, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Yeah, "somehow got obsessed"... the mark of a true Wikipedian! :D
 * Binksternet (talk) 05:16, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Rabatment of the rectangle
— HJ Mitchell |  Penny for your thoughts?   02:23, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Andromeda Strain
I concur with your post in Andromeda Strain Talk that mutations do not work that way, and tried to insert a section in the article for Plot Criticisms. Someone undid my edit. Do you think it was a reasonable edit? BillHart93 (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I think it's an important point, but to meet wikipedia guidelines we should find a notable critic who makes it. Matthew Miller (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

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

Reference errors on 22 March
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:30, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Logic model page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=711418945 your edit] caused a cite error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F711418945%7CLogic model%5D%5D Ask for help])

Reference errors on 18 November
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * On the Rook (card game) page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=750248295 your edit] caused an empty citation error (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F750248295%7CRook (card game)%5D%5D Ask for help])

Off-wiki canvassing
since your Wikipedia user page links to your personal website, which identifies you as Fedora Project Leader and in turn links to your Twitter account, I presume that my responding here to a tweet today from said account does not violate WP:OUTING. Call for friendly but safely neutral and un-affiliated help: the wikipedia page The Fedora Project could really use some updating. We have new vision and mission statements, and the 'history' section is missing A LOT of history. May 6, 2020

As you acknowledged in November 2016, "as current Fedora Project Leader, I have a significant conflict of interest." I commend you for disclosing your COI, for refraining from editing the article space, and for constructive use of the talk page back then to request updates.

However, your tweet today verges on stealth canvassing—using off-wiki communication to recruit editors in a way that is discouraged by our applicable guideline.

In my opinion, it would be better for you to repeat the process you followed in 2016. List the desired changes and references to support them at Talk:The Fedora Project, and wait for interested editors to respond without off-wiki prompting. NedFausa (talk) 18:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

 * Thanks for letting me know that this might be seen as problematic. I'm certainly not trying to do anything "stealth". I admit I'm not up on all of the jargon and culture of core wikipedia editors, but that page says "Canvassing is notification done with the intention of influencing the outcome of a discussion in a particular way". I am not aware of any ongoing discussion that I have any particular stake in the outcome of; I just wanted people to notice that the page is out of date and incomplete. I expect that anyone who might visit the talk page could already see that, which is why the 2016 notice there didn't really go anywhere. I'd love to hear better suggestions of something I can do to help with this. Matthew Miller (talk) 16:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I suggested that you repeat the process you followed in 2016. List the desired changes and references to support them at Talk:The Fedora Project, and wait for interested editors to respond without off-wiki prompting. I am watching that page and will do my best to satisfy your requests, provided they are verifiable. NedFausa (talk) 22:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gilman Square, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Winter Hill. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

"Modernist architecture" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Modernist architecture and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Veverve (talk) 21:17, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mattdm


text:
Grímur Jónsson Thorkelin

Grímur Jónsson Thorkelín (8 October 1752 – 4 March 1829) was an Icelandic–Danish-Norwegian scholar, who became the National Archivist of Norway and Denmark and Professor of Antiquities at Østfold University College.

In 1786 he travelled to England in order to search for documents relating to medieval Icelandic-English contacts and Anglo-Saxon manuscripts with Viking influence. In 1787 he hired British Museum employee James Matthews to transcribe the sole extant manuscript of the Old English epic poem Beowulf and made another copy himself. Matthews did not know Old English or the manuscript's insular script, and so copied what he saw, not always rendering correctly; Thorkelin, on the other hand, had knowledge of Old English which led him to introduce various emendations where he thought the text was incorrect. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the prestigious and honorary American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1890.

Under a commission from the Danish, Norwegian and Icelandic government, Thorkelin had prepared Beowulf for publication by 1807. During the Battle of Copenhagen (1807) his house was burned and demolished due to fire, and the text (on which he had spent 20 years) was lost. The manuscripts survived, however, and Thorkelin began again. The poem was eventually published in 1815. Thorkelin was the first scholar to make a full translation of the poem, into Latin.

The Thorkelín transcriptions are now an important textual source for Beowulf, as the original manuscript's margins have suffered from deterioration and vandalism throughout the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. His early copies provide a record in many areas where the text would otherwise be lost forever.

Thorkelín is generally regarded as one of the pioneering figures in Nordic and Germanic studies. Moreover, his visit to Britain reinvigorated interest and appreciation in the island's Germanic past, in ways both scholarly and romantic. However, this view is not without its detractors; Magnús Fjalldal describes Thorkelín as "essentially a fraud as a scholar" and lists a number of errors in Thorkelín's edition and translation, many of which were pointed out by contemporary scholars.

title: Grímur Jónsson Thorkelin


text:
Samuel Dick

Samuel Dick (November 14, 1740 – November 16, 1812) was an American physician who was a delegate for New Jersey to the Confederation Congress in 1784 and 1785.

Samuel was born at Nottingham in Prince George's County, Maryland. He studied medicine in Scotland before he opened a practice in Salem in 1740. He married Sarah Sinnickson on October 10, 1773, and they had ten children (Rebecca, Mary, John, Samuel Jr., Andrew, Isabella, Anna, Samuel Stewart, William and Maria). Sarah was the daughter of Andrew Sinnickson, and her brother Thomas represented New Jersey in the first U.S. Congress.

Dick served in the New Jersey militia before and during the Revolutionary War. When the 2nd New Jersey Regiment joined the Continental Army and was assigned to cover the withdrawal after the failed invasion of Canada, he accompanied them north as a surgeon in 1776. In June, with the Canada assignment over he returned to New Jersey. Later that year he was appointed a colonel, commanding the western battalion of the Salem County militia.

Dick was first elected to represent Salem in the New Jersey General Assembly in 1777. He was also appointed collector of customs for the state's western district in 1778. The state legislature elected him as a delegate to the Confederation Congress in 1783. In 1787, he was a delegate to the New Jersey convention that ratified the United States Constitution. He served for several years as a surrogate in the county courts for Salem County.

Dick died at home in Salem in 1812 and is buried in St. John's Episcopal Cemetery there.

title: Samuel Dick


text:
Talk:Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo

Is Cabrillo a traitor?
If Cabrilho was Portuguese and sailing for the Spanish before 1580, that would make him a traitor like Magellan (Portugal and Spain were enemies, and Spain annexed Portugal around 1580). Maybe that explains why his name is not famous in Portugal?

 * Cabrilho is quite well known in Portugal. Where does such strange idea comes from? He even came in Portuguese postal stamps, etc.75.42.79.126 (talk) 03:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

 * That is not how it worked. Portugal and Spain were rivals - not enemies, apart from when they were actually engaged in some conflict - and people from all over Iberia worked from one or the other country without being labelled "traitors". There were also same Castillian, Basque and Galician (and others) sailors working for Portugal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.138.208.165 (talk) 00:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Spain did not annex Portugal in 1580. King D. Sebastião died young and without a successor during a military incursion into Morocco. This resulted in a succession crisis temporarily resolved with the appointment of his uncle Cardinal D. Henrique as interim king. At the time of his death in 1580 King Filipe II of Spain, being a grandson of King Manuel I of Portugal, was legally recognised by the Portuguese Cortes (kind of Parliament) as King of Portugal. The two kingdoms remained fully separated (ran by separate administrations) until 1620 when Madrid moved to merge the two administrations. This led to the revolution of 1640 and the appointment of Afonso IV as king of Portugal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.212.16.118 (talk) 11:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

Cabrillo to Cabrillo
An anonymous user has changed Cabrillo to Cabrilho throughout, but fortunately has not suppressed the reference to the recent biography that discusses his parentage. Localist competitions make for second-rate history, wherever they turn up. Wetman 20:59, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

you can see that this is in fact true at http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9018466/Juan-Rodriguez-Cabrillo. the name is portuguese. english changed it to juan rodriguez cabrillo. just as mary is maria, marie and maro. :D

 * That was undoubtedly his birthname. However in the English language he's best known as "Cabrillo", so that's what we call him. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 21:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

But Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo is not his true name. For correctness I think the article should be named after the explorer true name! Of course with the mention of his nickname... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.82.99.85 (talk) 14:19, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Names here in the English Wikipedia get listed as they are commonly referred to in English. For example we have Francis I of France (not François); Victor Emmanuel III of Italy (rather than Vittorio Emanuele); etc. In the U.S., and in Spanish America for which he sailed, he is always referred to as Cabrillo. --MelanieN (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

This is rubbish - so why it is John Cabot then, and not Juan Cabot? When in fact Giovanni Caboto was from Venice? The true name is João Rodrigues Cabrilho - call it John in English if you want, but why Juan? Total nonsense, lack of scientific rigour also!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.183.203.14 (talk) 20:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

 * It's "John Cabot", because that is the most common name in English. Same reason here, as explained above and at WP:COMMONNAME. but you can't even come up with a consistent analogy for your argument. Til Eulenspiegel /[[User talk:Til

Eulenspiegel|talk]]/ 20:14, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

 * It seems the lack of consistency is instead on the Wikipedia policy - at times using John (like in many Portuguese kings' names) for Portuguese João, and in this case using instead the Castilian name Juan for João. It is sad to see that Wikipedia best judgement/definition of consistency is then based on "what is more common", even if being common means being wrong.75.42.79.126 (talk) 03:56, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Speaking of consistency still - Sebastião Rodrigues Soromenho shows up with his Portuguese name in the English Wikipedia entry, when describing his 1595-1596 expedition along the coast of California, also when the Bay of San Francisco got its name (today's Drake Bay). Why not use his "castilianized" name instead (as done with Cabrilho) then: Sebastián Rodríguez Cermeño? Lots of consistency from Wikipedia here - bah....

 * The USA Library of Congress uses the name João Cabrilho in their web pages. What about that for consistency - it is the USA Library of Congress! Probably that is not a "reliable source" or "the most common usage" for the Wikipedia people either. The Library of Congress puts the Portuguese in their Hispanic section though. This is fine if being the Greek/Roman Empire Hispania Province (before Portugal and 300 years later Spain, even existed). Totally wrong though if being the uniquely bizarre USA-used only wrong anthropo-ethnic definition of Hispanic people nowadays, that scientifically should be called mestizos (in Castilian - or mamelucos, in Portuguese), like in a cross-bread between Europeans and local natives.

And since when Portuguese names João are called Juan in English? That is not the case for many Kings of Portugal, that in English are called correctly João or John (adopting the English equivalent). Say João I, João II, João III - that are known as such or John I, John II, John III. How consistent is that in usage of names? How consistent is also to have English replaced by Castilian? And if this is just because "it is the most common name", then you can also keep perpetuating other mistakes in history and science - and change the geometrical shape of Earth from sphere to a square, because that used to be more common too ages ago. Does the word update means anything to you?

 * Per policy, we should reflect the fact that nearly all of the literature on him in English still calls him "Juan Cabrillo", until such time as it can be said that "most of the works coming out about him are now spelling it Joao Cabrilho." I haven't seen any evidence of a trend in this direction. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 20:33, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Well then it is your choice: wait for everyone to catch up, or lead the change now to what are correct data, facts and names. That is what distinguishes a leader from a follower.

Likewise essentially the vast majority (unfortunately....sigh!...) of USA-authors based history is completely at fault when it refers Balboa to be the first European to sight the Pacific in 1512. In 1511 Antonio de Abreu was already in Timor - and the east coast of Timor is on the Pacific already. Anyway Pacific Ocean is the name that comes only also after Magellan in the 1520's. This is clear like water in all serious and error-clean scientific historic literature. Yet, you find again and again the same mistake in many USA scientific published papers or even books. Nothing is perfect, nobody knows everything - but this Balboa mistake is a systematic example where "being more common" does not makes it correct. Likewise, mutatis mutandis, with João Cabrilho. Again it is your choice: you want to be "trendy", go with what all the crowd does, or be correct and scientifically detailed?!!!

On the same line of ideas - nearly everyone used to say Cabrilho was Spanish, but now that finally has been corrected even in the Wikipedia. It took a while unfortunately, nobody wanted to look into scientific data: just following what the "crowd" was doing.

Ok - let the crowd keep making mistakes and Wikipedia be passive about it. Juan then...

Dixit.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.183.203.14 (talk) 20:42, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia does not lead. We follow what the Reliable Sources are saying. And the Reliable Sources are pretty clear in referring to him as Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo (starting with the U.S. government with Cabrillo National Monument). (Re: nearly everyone used to say Cabrilho was Spanish,; I live in San Diego and I can assure you that nobody either here or on Wikipedia has ever claimed that Cabrilho was Spanish; see, for example, this version from 2006. It's just as it says in the article, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo is what he was called when he was sailing for the Spanish Empire; João Cabrilho is how his name would have been rendered in Portuguese.) --MelanieN (talk) 03:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

I do not know why Wikipedia leads into errors then, if it does not lead into correct facts. If the USA government insists in writing in the US dollars bills "in God we trust", it does not mean all USA citizens are believers in a God. I do not call that a "Reliable Source". If the Portuguese Government/Navy wrote in the modern statue/Monument to Cabrilho "João Rodrigues Cabrilho" - why is it not the Portuguese Navy a reliable source then? Is it reliable only written - wrongly ! - in the Castilian "version" (???!!!!) ?? Again if this is a question of using the English equivalent - then use John, but why adopting in the past and continuing to do the same error of using a Castilian name for a Portuguese sailor? Why Juan? Why Rodriguez? Why Cabrillo? This makes no sense at all when these names are not English either. So the only thing the Wikipedia is leading/contributing to is making an error perpetual. Again you can keep saying the Earth is flat or square if you want - just because "Reliable Sources" used to say so. These guardians of "knowledge" in the Medieval Age ended up burning Giordano Bruno alive, just because he was not a "Reliable Source", defending planets should exist around other stars. I think it is a blunt mistake keep using a Castilian name for a Portuguese sailor - if you are not using the English equivalent anyway. Is this to help the excellent world geography and world history levels of knowledge the average US citizen has?

I strongly and politely advise you to redefine "Reliable Sources" - I gave the example of Balboa above to see how "Reliable Sources" can be wrong. I am just asking for logic - you insist in applying an old and wrong recipe "just because it has been so". This is called a bad conservative posture. Conserving the mistake. Or is Castilian the official language of California now? I thought it was English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.2.61.70 (talk) 20:48, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Cabrillo portuguese
Nearly every source in the internet describes Cabrillo as portuguese, including the spanish edition of the wikipedia. So I changed the nationality from spanish to portuguese. 84.90.18.136 19:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Alas - how could you have done that? What a mistake, if what was more common before was to consider Cabrilho Spanish. How dare you? Wikipedia runs (seemingly) based on "what is more common", even if being mistakes...so you just defied such policy - and hey...actually ran into facts and scientific accuracy instead. Bravo!!75.42.79.126 (talk) 04:00, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

History
he was the first person to discover san diego shores —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.9.91.114 (talk) 00:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

 * No, the local natives discovered that area long before he arrived. That said, Cabrillo led the first European expedition to see many California sites. -Will Beback · † · 01:26, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

His name came from...
His name came a cat carc that now is extient[[Media:[[Media:  —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by 70.115.232.239 (talk) 01:32, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The Origin of Cabrillo's voyage was not from Mexico
The flagship San Salvador and Victoria were not built in Navidad, Mexico. Cabrillo (according to the following discussion in the spanish Wikipedia article by Professor Carmen González Huguet of the José Matías Delgado University in San Salvador, El Salvador) Built these ships on the orders of Pedro de Alvarado in the Xiribaltique Bay, in native tongue (now called the Jiquilisco Bay in Usulutan Department of El Salvador). He departed from the Port of Acaxutla (now Acajutla, still a small port by the way)off the Salvadoran coast bound north to Navidad, Mexico and on to discover the coast of California. Furthermore, she mentions not two ships, but rather 13 that were built and piloted by Cabrillo, of course the San Salvador being the flagship.

Her narrative.......(Spansih)

"Mi nombre es Carmen González Huguet, soy profesora de Historia de la Universidad "Dr. José Matías Delgado", en El Salvador. He leído con curiosidad la página sobre Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo y quisiera referirme a un error de bulto. Dicen ustedes textualmente:

"En 1540 un terremoto destruyó la antigua ciudad de Santiago de Guatemala, se dice que Cabrillo notificó del incidente a la corona española y esa información se considera el primer reportaje que se haya enviado de un acontecimiento ocurrido en el nuevo mundo hacia Europa.- Desde un puerto guatemalteco de la costa del océano pacífico, Cabrillo se dedicó durante un tiempo a importar y exportar mercaderías entre España, Guatemala y otras partes del imperio español"

Esta información no es exacta. La villa de Santiago de los Caballeros de Guatemala fue fundada primeramente por don Pedro de Alvarado en las cercanías de Iximché, capital de los señores cakchiqueles, en 1524, durante la primera etapa de la conquista de Guatemala. En 1527 los cakchiqueles, aliados de los españoles como los tlaxcaltecas en México, se rebelaron. Eso forzó a los españoles a fundar nuevamente la villa de Santiago en un paraje próximo a la actual Ciudad Vieja, en el valle de Almolonga, el 22 de noviembre de 1527.

En la madrugada del 11 de septiembre de 1541, un alud de piedras y lodo bajó del Volcán de Agua (que no un terremoto) y destruyó la ciudad. En este desastre murió doña Beatriz de la Cueva, la viuda del conquistador Pedro de Alvarado. Esta señora había sido nombrada Gobernadora de Guatemala a la muerte de su marido. Fue la única mujer que ostentó dicho cargo en toda la época colonial. La destrucción de la villa hizo que volviera a fundarse, esta vez en el valle de Panchoy, en la actual ubicación conocida como Antigua Guatemala.

En la probanza de méritos de sus descendientes, se afirma que Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo y su familia tuvieron encomiendas en el territorio de El Salvador, en Jicalapa, población situada en la zona conocida hoy con el nombre de Costa del Bálsamo, entre los actuales departamentos de Sonsonate y La Libertad. Bernal Díaz del Castillo, en su "Historia verdadera de la conquista de la Nueva España menciona en el capítulo CCIII (México, Alianza ditorial, 1991, pag. 831): "Razón es que se traiga a la memoria y no quede por olvido una muy buena armada que el adelantado don Pedro de Alvarado hizo el año de 1537 en la provincia de Guatemala, donde era gobernador, y en un puerto que se dice Acaxutla, en la banda del sur, y fue para cumplir ciertas capitulaciones que con su majestad hizo la segunda vez que volvió a Castilla y vino casado con una señora que se decía doña Beatriz de la Cueva; y fue el concierto que se capituló con su majestad, que el adelantado pusiese ciertos navíos y pilotos y marineros y soldados y bastimentos, y todo lo que hubiese menester, a su costa, para enviar a descubrir por la vía del poniente a la China o Malucos u otras cualquier isla de la Especiería..." Aquí Bernal trenza datos de dos expediciones: la de 1537, cuando Alvarado fue, efectivamente, a Perú, y la de 1540, cuando iba a las islas de la Especiería. En este segundo viaje fue cuando llegado al puerto de Navidad el virrey Mendoza suscribió con Alvarado unas capitulaciones. El gobernador de Guatemala acudió en defensa de los españoles que estaqban siendo atacados por los indios y Alvarado murió, en el peñol de Nochistlán, a consecuencia de las heridas que le ocasionó un caballo que rodó por una pendiente: el caballo del escribano Baltasar Montoya. Acaxutla no es otra que el actual puerto de Acajutla, en la costa del departamento de Sonsonate. Conclusión: de acuerdo con la probanza de méritos, Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo construyó en Xiribaltique (en la actual bahía de Jiquilisco, departamento de Usulután) y pilotó para don Pedro de Alvarado una armada de trece barcos (el dato es de Bernal) que partió de Acajutla y que eventualmente descubrió California."

KeniKex 21:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Birthdate
An IP recently changed Cabrillo's birthdate, which we had listed as March 13, 1499, to "unknown". Another editor reverted the change, but on research I believe the IP was correct. I could find no scholarly support for that date or for any birthdate. Biographies mostly state that his birthdate, birthplace and parentage are unknown; from his later career they speculate that he was born around 1498 to 1500. I have changed the birthdate in the article accordingly, with references. OK with everybody? --MelanieN (talk) 23:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I reverted the IP as suspect without a source but since you have found one, it's all good... Also I have no idea where the March 13 1499 date came from or who added it - I only reverted for the reason I gave. Cheers, Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 23:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

New placements
After juan cabrillo named california, Sebastian Vizcaino explored after him and renamed those places. Those names made our present day california. ecall992 juan cabrillo. In life

I had evidence about the naming

Undecipherable word
In the section titled "Nationality" is this sentence (partially quoted here): "His nationality was first addressed by contemporary Spanish orly chronicler Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas..." What does "orly" mean?

67.131.78.34 (talk) 04:20, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that. It was added by a troll in January and nobody caught it. I've deleted it now. Anything else you see that needs fixing, please let us know - or go ahead and fix it! --MelanieN (talk) 14:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Change title name
The article's title should be changed to his real name João Rodrigues Cabrilho, since he was a Portuguese national. The current display is a Spanish variation of his name, but not it's correct writting or spelling. The fact that the English speaking viewers are more used to the Spanish variation or if the English books present that same variation is irrelevant. If someone's name is, let's imagine, John Thatcher, it would be ridiculous for the Portuguese article entry of him to be displayed as "João Colmo".

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by PedroLFMA (talk • contribs) 02:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

 * The relevant Wikipedia policy is WP:COMMONNAME. For an illustration in practice, consider the article on Christopher Columbus. If Cabrilho is best known to English speakers as Cabrillo, then that's the name the article uses. —C.Fred (talk) 02:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Then within the most respectful terms...that's bias. And the same is valid for Christopher Columbus, which can be understood partially as it is the English translation of his name, in this specific case a Spanish translation of a Portuguese name is being used in a English-written article...go figure. But again, Wikipedia's users have the power to change this rules don't they?
 * Wikipedians do have the power to change policy, however this is the current policy installed. The international community knows this specific article-subject by his spanish name. the majority of the sources use this name. From this we derive the consensus that the spanish name is the right one to use for the article, there is no doubt. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 05:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Maybe he was Spanish after all?
A researcher has discovered a document that could finally settle the "Spanish or Portuguese?" debate. In 1532, in a trial involving the theft of gold from a Spanish vessel, one of the witnesses was one Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo - who testified under oath that he was born in Palma de Micergilio, which is in the province of Cordova in Spain. Other details of that witness's biography match known facts about the Cabrillo who is the subject of this article. There has never before been any definite information about where he was born. Of course, the Portuguese have claimed him for centuries and are not likely to give him up without a struggle. How should we handle this new information? --MelanieN (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

 * This is important! I propose removing "Portuguese" (and any other mention of nationality) from the lead paragraph and adding a paragraph to the "Nationality" section referencing this new research and citing the news article. WCCasey (talk) 01:43, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree about adding the paragraph to the Nationality section (and if possible citing the actual academic paper, as well as the news article). Other than that, I think you are right in your implication that we should not rush into anything. This is a recently announced discovery, it is still being digested by historians. The Portuguese in particular want to review the original documents. I do note that the two best-known historians / biographers of Cabrillo both immediately embraced this new finding. Maybe, as you suggest, removing any mention of nationality from the lead and infobox is the way to go - until some kind of academic / national consensus is clear. I may have time to work on that later this weekend. --MelanieN (talk) 05:07, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

OK, here's a proposal. I suggest that in the first sentence we replace "Portuguese" with "European". In the "Nationality" section, I proposed to replace the first paragraph with possibly these two paragraphs (first draft):"His nationality has been debated for centuries. He was described as Portuguese by Spanish chronicler Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas; in his Historia General de los hechos de los Castellanos en las Islas y tierra firme del Mar Oceano, written 60 years after Cabrillo's death, Herrera referred to Cabrillo as Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo Português. The Portuguese claim him as a national hero, and several locations in Portugal claim to be his birthplace. However, the source for Herrera's description is unknown, and some historians have long believed that Cabrillo was from Spain. Harry Kelsey, in his exhaustive 1986 biography Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, writes that Cabrillo probably was born in Seville, Spain. In 2015 a Canadian researcher, investigating a series of Spanish legal documents from a 1532 lawsuit, found that one of the witnesses in the lawsuit was named Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo. That witness testified under oath that he was born in Palma de Micergilio, a town in the province of Cordova in Spain. Other details of the witness's biography match known facts about the explorer. Several historians of Cabrillo hailed the find as a major historical breakthrough. Robert Munson, historian at the Cabrillo National Monument, said “This could be the smoking gun that proves where Cabrillo was born.” University of San Diego history professor Iris Engstrand said, 'In all the articles I've written about Cabrillo, I note that we have no proof of where he was born. Now we sort of do.' Harry Kelsey, a research scholar at the Huntington Library who wrote a major biography of Cabrillo, said, 'Right now all the circumstantial evidence points in the right direction (i.e., Spain). This is the most exciting thing to happen to me in 40 years.” However, a leader of San Diego's Portuguese community said the new evidence must be carefully evaluated, and requested that copies of the documents be turned over to the Portuguese government for study."

One question: I quoted reactions from three people, is that too much? A broader question: The ONLY source for this information is an article by Peter Rowe in the San Diego Union Tribune and Los Angeles Times. Everything else I found at Google News is reprints of that article. The Canadian researcher does not appear to have published her results anywhere that I could find. Is it too soon to feature this information, if there is only one source for it? Opinions please. --MelanieN (talk) 17:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Thinking further about this, I think we should not make such a big deal of it until there is more sourcing. Maybe a single paragraph like this: "His nationality has been debated for centuries. He was described as Portuguese by Spanish chronicler Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas; in his Historia General de los hechos de los Castellanos en las Islas y tierra firme del Mar Oceano, written 60 years after Cabrillo's death, Herrera referred to Cabrillo as Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo Português. The Portuguese claim him as a national hero, and several locations in Portugal claim to be his birthplace. However, the source for Herrera's description is unknown, and some historians have long believed that Cabrillo was from Spain. Harry Kelsey, in his exhaustive 1986 biography Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo, writes that Cabrillo probably was born in Seville, Spain. In 2015 a Canadian researcher, investigating a series of Spanish legal documents from a 1532 lawsuit, found that one of the witnesses in the lawsuit was named Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo. That witness testified under oath that he was born in Palma de Micergilio, a town in the province of Cordova in Spain. Other details of the witness's biography match known facts about the explorer. Several historians of Cabrillo hailed the discovery as a historic find supporting the idea that Cabrillo was Spanish. However, a leader of San Diego's Portuguese community cautioned that the new evidence must be carefully evaluated, and requested that copies of the documents be turned over to the Portuguese government for study."

Comments? (I do still think we should replace "Portuguese" with "European" in the lead.) --MelanieN (talk) 17:43, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

 * "European" seems unnecessarily ambiguous. He was either Spanish or Portuguese, and the dispute about that is discussed in the "Nationality" section. I still vote for removing all mention of his nationality from the intro. The extra paragraph, as written above, seems good to me, except that I would put the at the end of the paragraph (unless there are different sources for the last three sentences). --WCCasey
 * OK, thanks for the input. I'll just leave out any nationality, I think you're right about that. I would prefer to cite the reference link twice, as shown - once right at the statement of where he said he was born, since it is so important and potentially controversial, and again at the end of the paragraph to show the source for the rest of the paragraph. Are you OK with that? --MelanieN (talk) 20:53, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and boldly did it. Of course the issue is still open for comments, suggestions, etc. --MelanieN (talk) 22:11, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I think its important to remember that, as important as nationality is in later times, people of Crabillo/Cabrilho's time might not have had the same view. What was more important was being the subject of a particular king/nobleman, and perhaps a fully vested resident of a town or parish. Where was his hometown, and what king did he obey? The Iberian Peninsula was a complex array of overlapping polities during his lifetime.66.68.207.59 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:19, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

Update: The "Spanish birthplace" information has now been published in the San Diego Historical Society's journal. IMO that gives the Spanish claim an authority that was never present for the Portuguese claim. Another editor and I have now modified the lede sentence to describe him as born in Spain, while adding that longtime tradition associates him with Portugal. --MelanieN (talk) 19:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

 * About Cabrillo’s nationality – for more than four hundred years there has been no prove of Cabrillo’s nationality until 2015 when Dr. Wendy Kramer, (historian, researcher, author and paleographer focusing on 16th century Spanish government and the encomienda system) discovered 1532 documents in Guatemala, Spain and North America that proves that he was a native of Palma de Micer Gilio (today Palma del Rio), Cordoba, Spain. In her article in The Journal of San Diego History, volume 62, Summer/Fall 2016  she shows documents from 1532 testimonies that Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo himself testifies that he is from Spain.  Furthermore, in her new book "Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo (C. 1497-1543)" published in Spain this year (2018), she shows over 20 documents that methodically proves that he is native of Spain. Dr. Wendy Kramer is now working on an English version that should be available in the United States by the end of this year. --dB (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the update. As you can see from the above discussion, we were aware of her discovery in 2015, but since we did not have anything authoritative - just a news report - we were waiting for her to publish her findings. We just removed "Portuguese" from the lede, leaving no national identity. Now that she has published in a reputable journal, IMO we can regard the question as settled and say he was Spanish (while acknowledging the longstanding "Portuguese" tradition). --MelanieN (talk) 20:57, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the updates and fix my references! Finally this mystery was solved! dB (talk) 21:26, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * This "mystery" is far from solved, you cannot take it upon yourself to continue reinstating that he was spanish in the lead. The Royal Academy of Spanish History itself continues to list Cabrillo as Portuguese. One scholarly publication does not give you the power to continue reverting edits and stating with definitiveness that he was Spanish (and it is certainly far from any consensus in the historiographical community). The current phrasing is both accurate and highly neutral, despite the fact that the majority of sources and institutions continue list him as Portuguese. Should there be new developments in the historiography concerning Cabrillo, you are welcome to bring them here to the talk page. Otherwise please refrain from acting unanimously on affirming his nationality. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 01:53, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

 * The Royal Academy of Spanish History does recognize him as Spanish, not Portuguese; accept Kramer's conclusions: .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.214.166 (talk) 10:37, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo. 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/20130402230021/http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/WWcabrillo.htm to http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/WWcabrillo.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130822014111/http://www.cabrillocivicclubs.org/index.asp to http://www.cabrillocivicclubs.org/index.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060627075135/http://www.instituto-camoes.pt/cvc/navegaport/d14.html to http://www.instituto-camoes.pt/cvc/navegaport/d14.html

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) 00:34, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Cabrillo College, etc
George Washington also had slaves 104.220.108.138 (talk) 23:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Just want to add that Cabrilho was not particularly different for worse than the society he lived at. Indigenous people were also slaving each other, even before the arrival of Europeans. The stronger native tribes in Central America would sell weaker native slaves to the Spanish, like in Costa Rica, etc. The Spanish were always outnumbered, but always had natives enemy of other natives in their troops. There were native cannibals doing atrocities as bad as the Spanish ones, etc. In Nicaragua and Panama some free black men also had Indian slaves working in farms for them, etc.
 * Thus singling out the explorer who actually died to discover, map, bring California to cartography...is very peculiar. Specially considering the Spanish did not properly explore California for the next 200 years, just coasting down on the way back with the Phillipines galleons. The USA history of colonization and damage to California natives was far deeper than anything Cabrilho could have done.
 * No wonder a majority of voters said no to Cabrillo College name change. How democratic is that, to ignore the majority? Yet, that is not quoted in this Wikipedia entry, is it?
 * There are better ways to help natives and anyone discriminated today, versus judging someone from half a millenia ago.
 * By the same token, and for consistency, since George Washington also had a dozen slaves, and during the Roman Empire anyone defeated could become a slave, ending up in the coliseum...then we should change the name of Washington State and the USA capital...and stop using this Roman alphabet and numerals, and roads, and aqueducts and Senators, etc.
 * This historical puritanism/revisionism is not going to bring us anywhere better, since the past is the past. To construct a better future examples of bravery and discovery and navigation capacities should be kept, as in Cabrilho and George Washington. There are plenty of worst/bad people to blame from those times, without pinpointing those who at least brought something good to civilization...or else I would not be here writing in the Roman alphabet, despite Rome enslaving everyone they could.
 * Peace 104.220.108.138 (talk) 23:44, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo


text:
User:Kizzle/John Kerry New Main Page Military Section

Military service (1966-1970)
Main Article: John Kerry Military Service


text:
User talk:Origami dragon

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

title: User talk:Origami dragon


text:
Talk:Military service of John Kerry

sorry, meant to create this in sandbox format first...--kizzle 21:01, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

have asked User:Joseph_Dwayne to comment here on his merge tag. Wolfman 05:05, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * have removed merge tag, pending response by User:Joseph_Dwayne. Wolfman 19:52, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Military service of John Kerry


text:
Talk:Kitana

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Kitana. 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/20150402094109/http://geodepress.com/continued-interview-with-lorrisa-julianus-aka-zenobia/ to http://geodepress.com/continued-interview-with-lorrisa-julianus-aka-zenobia/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150203100400/http://www.thegamingliberty.com/2011/02/the-97-midway-court-case-shang-tsung-and-kitana-speak/ to http://www.thegamingliberty.com/2011/02/the-97-midway-court-case-shang-tsung-and-kitana-speak
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131021044728/http://revision3.com/nixiepixel/hot-game-girls to http://revision3.com/nixiepixel/hot-game-girls
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130608123132/http://amog.com/babes/156918-10-sexiest-female-video-game-characters-time/ to http://amog.com/babes/156918-10-sexiest-female-video-game-characters-time/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130618070823/http://soletron.com/the-10-hottest-female-video-game-characters/ to http://soletron.com/the-10-hottest-female-video-game-characters/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130105031449/http://www.ugo.com/movies/best-movie-ever-mortal-kombat-kano-vs-sonya-blade to http://www.ugo.com/movies/best-movie-ever-mortal-kombat-kano-vs-sonya-blade
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110615162936/http://www.ugo.com/girls/hot-ninja-girls?page=5 to http://www.ugo.com/girls/hot-ninja-girls?page=5
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130401202148/http://www.ugo.com/games/top-11-mortal-kombat-fatalities to http://www.ugo.com/games/top-11-mortal-kombat-fatalities

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) 09:21, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Kitana. 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/20131013052519/http://geek-news.mtv.com/2013/08/06/heroes-of-cosplay-cosplayer-reax/ to http://geek-news.mtv.com/2013/08/06/heroes-of-cosplay-cosplayer-reax/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140115050807/http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2013/05/15/top-10-video-game-loves/ to http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2013/05/15/top-10-video-game-loves/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415043142/http://www.ugo.com/games/video-game-hotties-kitana to http://www.ugo.com/games/video-game-hotties-kitana
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121003072304/http://www.gamesradar.com/top-20-overlooked-game-babes/ to http://www.gamesradar.com/top-20-overlooked-game-babes/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415043142/http://www.ugo.com/games/video-game-hotties-kitana to http://www.ugo.com/games/video-game-hotties-kitana
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015114743/http://www.gamingunion.net/news/top-10-video-game-heroines--5814.html to http://www.gamingunion.net/news/top-10-video-game-heroines--5814.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205145840/http://www.mania.com/top-10-hot-but-mostly-bothered-video-game-females_article_58486.html to http://www.mania.com/top-10-hot-but-mostly-bothered-video-game-females_article_58486.html

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) 01:26, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Kitana. 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/20150518081258/http://www.mezcotoyz.com/mortal-kombat-x-series-2-kitana to http://www.mezcotoyz.com/mortal-kombat-x-series-2-kitana
 * Added tag to http://au.ibtimes.com/wwe-immortals-gameplay-roster-revealed-1409252
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120829091214/http://www.officialplaystationmagazine.co.uk/2011/11/01/wwe-divas-mortal-kombat-kosplay/ to http://www.officialplaystationmagazine.co.uk/2011/11/01/wwe-divas-mortal-kombat-kosplay/

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) 07:40, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Theres no header image currently
--5.173.104.162 (talk) 17:47, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks for pointing it out. --Krótki (talk) 19:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Sex appeal
This has to be one of the funniest articles I've ever had the misfortune of reading. Does anybody object to trimming down the paragraphs of trashy listicles about which video game characters have the best boobs? It makes me wonder if other female fighting game character articles are this bad. XeCyranium (talk) 01:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Reception section
I don't know if this is a video game character article or pornographic actress, the reception is full of nonsense like sexiest female characters/babes, fucktality, nudality and full of horny sources. Sorry if it sounds rude 😕 39.50.240.149 (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

 * @Kung Fu Man @Beemer69 @Greenish Pickle! @MoonJet I hope you guys do a better job and make this article less messier than Lionel Messi 😌 39.50.235.97 (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I've been meaning to tinker with that section for a long time. In addition to what you mentioned, a good chunk of that section is now either nonviable or outdated. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  05:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * A suggestion I have is that you could combine a few of these sentences into one general sentence about reviewers thinking the character is sexy. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:49, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kitana


text:
User:Kizzle/John Kerry Military Service Controversy

During the 2004 presidential campaign, John Kerry's Vietnam war record became the subject of controversy. In television advertisements and a book "Unfit for Command", the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth (SBVT) questioned Kerry's service record and the merit of his combat medals. Several SBVT members were in the same unit with Kerry, but only one, Stephen Gardner, served on the same boat. Other SBVT members included two of Kerry's former commanding officers, Grant Hibbard and George Elliott. Hibbard and Elliot have alleged, respectively, that Kerry's first Purple Heart and Silver Star were undeserved. In addition, members of SBVT have questioned his other medals and his truthfulness in testimony about the war. Defenders of John Kerry's war record, including nearly all of his former crewmates, have charged that organizers of SBVT had close ties to the Bush presidential campaign and that the accusations were false and politically motivated.

First Purple Heart
Grant Hibbard, Kerry's former commander, and other SBVT members have questioned Kerry's first Purple Heart, received for a wound sustained on December 2 1968. They assert that the injury was much too minor to merit a citation since the only treatment Kerry received was bacitracin and a bandage, and that he returned to service immediately. SBVT also claims that the wound was not from enemy fire but was from shrapnel of a grenade he fired himself.

The criteria for the Purple Heart specify citation for any injury received during combat requiring treatment by a medical officer. Under military regulations, the Purple Heart is awarded for "friendly fire" wounds in the "heat of battle", so long as the fire is targeted "under full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment."

An article in the Boston Globe described the circumstances in which Purple Hearts were given to wounded soldiers in Vietnam:
 *  'There were an awful lot of Purple Hearts — from shrapnel; some of those might have been M-40 grenades,' said George Elliott, Kerry's commanding officer. 'The Purple Hearts were coming down in boxes. Kerry, he had three Purple Hearts. None of them took him off duty.  Not to belittle it, that was more the rule than the exception.'

In Douglas Brinkley's book Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War, Brinkley notes that Purple Hearts were given out frequently:

 * As generally understood, the Purple Heart is given to any U.S. citizen wounded in wartime service to the nation. Giving out Purple Hearts increased as the United States started sending Swifts up rivers.  Sailors — no longer safe on aircraft carriers or battleships in the Gulf of Tonkin — were starting to bleed, a lot.

In the SBVT advertisement, Dr. Lewis Letson asserted "I know John Kerry is lying about his first Purple Heart because I treated him for that injury," but did not specify what the alleged lie was. Kerry's medical records list a medic, J. C. Carreon, as the "person administering treatment" for this wound. Dr. Letson's name does not appear on the record, but he claims that it was common for medics to sign the paperwork even though Letson would treat the patient. However, the claim cannot be verified as Carreon died in 1992.

On the night in question, Kerry's skimmer opened fire on suspected guerrillas on the shore. During this encounter, Kerry suffered a shrapnel wound in the left arm above the elbow. Accounts differ over the crew aboard the skimmer, the source of Kerry's injury, and several other major details. No after-action report for this incident is known to exist.

SBVT's claims about the incident are primarily based on an account by retired Rear Admiral William Schachte, then a Lieutenant. Schachte regularly led training missions for recently arrived officers such as Kerry. Schachte has stated he was the senior officer on Kerry's skimmer on the night of Kerry's injury, and had participated in all previous skimmer missions up to and including that evening. Schachte stated that the skimmer opened fire because of suspicous movement on the shore. In an August 2004 interview, Schatche stated there was no hostile return fire, and Kerry was "nicked" by a fragment from an M-79 grenade launcher he fired himself.  In an April 2003 interview, Schachte had described the action as a "firefight" and said of Kerry: "He got hit."

Kerry crewmates Bill Zaladonis and Patrick Runyon dispute Schachte's account. Zaladonis stated that "Myself, Pat Runyon, and John Kerry, we were the only ones in the skimmer." Runyon added, "Me and Bill aren't the smartest, but we can count to three." They recounted that the skimmer opened fire on suspected guerrillas attempting to evade the patrol, as they ran from sampan boats onto the shore. Both Runyon and Zaladonis believe, but are not completely certain, that the skimmer received return hostile fire; Runyon commented, "It was the scariest night of my life." Runyon also stated that he is "100 percent certain" that no one on the boat fired a grenade launcher.  Zaladonis has noted that Schachte went on "a bunch of" other skimmer missions and speculated that Schachte might have inadvertently mixed up his dates.

SBVT also points to the narration of a subsequent event in Tour of Duty (pp. 188-189). Brinkley opens the account of a four-day cruise by telling us how "Kerry —who had just turned 25 on December 11, 1968— was a fine leader of his men". He goes on to quote Kerry's reflections in his notebook: "A cocky feeling of invincibility accompanied us up the Long Tau shipping channel because we hadn't been shot at yet, and Americans at war who haven't been shot at are allowed to be cocky." SBVT argues that this journal entry shows that the incident could not have involved enemy fire. Others argue that Kerry was referring to ambushes, a common misfortune for Swift boats which Kerry had not yet suffered.

Bronze Star
Kerry's Bronze Star has been criticized by former Swift boat commander Larry Thurlow. During the incident leading to the medal, Thurlow was in overall command of a five-boat fleet including Kerry's. In 2004 Thurlow, along with two other SBVT members, alleged that Kerry's citation for bravery under fire is false because neither Kerry's boat nor any of the others was under hostile fire. In a sworn affidavit about the incident, Thurlow testified, "I never heard a shot." Of the five boat commanders present, beside Kerry and Thurlow, two others are SBVT members who now claim that there was no hostile fire during the incident. The fifth, Dan Droz, was later killed in action; however, his widow recalls Droz's account as being consistent with Kerry's.

Several other witnesses insist that there was hostile fire during the incident. Jim Rassmann, the Special Forces captain Kerry rescued, wrote, "Machine-gun fire erupted from both banks of the river...When I surfaced, all the Swift boats had left, and I was alone taking fire from both banks. To avoid the incoming fire, I repeatedly swam under water." Del Sandusky, the driver on Kerry's boat, PCF-94, stated, "I saw the gun flashes in the jungle, and I saw the bullets skipping across the water." Wayne Langhofer, who manned the machine gun on Dan Droz's PCF-43, stated, "There was a lot of firing going on, and it came from both sides of the river." Michael Medeiros, aboard PCF-94, recalled "a massive ambush. There were rockets and light machine gun fire plus small arms." Jim Russell, the Psychological Operations Officer of the unit, who was on PCF-43, wrote "All the time we were taking small arms fire from the beach... Anyone who doesn't think that we were being fired upon must have been on a different river."

Although it is not mentioned in Unfit for Command, Thurlow himself was awarded a Bronze Star for his actions during the same incident. Thurlow's citation includes several phrases indicating hostile fire such as "despite enemy bullets flying about him" and "enemy small arms and automatic weapons fire", and speaks of fire directed at "all units" of the five-boat fleet. Thurlow's medal recommendation, signed by Elliott, used the phrasing "under constant enemy small arms fire." Robert Lambert, Thurlow's chief petty officer, won his own Bronze Star for "courage under fire" for pulling Thurlow out of the water. Lambert still insists that the boats were receiving fire from the enemy.

Thurlow claims that his Bronze Star citation (given to him after he had left the military) is in error. He now states that he noticed some errors when he received the citation in 1969 but saw no reason to try to correct the record. He and others in SBVT claim that Kerry wrote the after-action report upon which all the citations were based. However, Lambert's medal citation contains considerable detail about the incident which would not have been visible to Kerry given his position across the river at the time.  The report is initialed "KJW", who SBVT claims is Kerry. However, Kerry's initials are "JFK", and SBVT cites no reason why Kerry would have included a "W". These same initials "KJW" appear on other reports about events in which Kerry did not participate. A Navy official stated to the New York Times that the initials referred, not to the author of the report, but to the headquarters staffer who received it.

Several documents beyond the medal citations indicate hostile fire during the action. The weekly report from Task Force 115 twice refers to the incident as "an enemy initiated firefight". According to a damage report, Thurlow's boat received three bullet holes that day; he now claims at least one bullet hole was from action the previous day. Kerry's boat had three blown-out windows and other damage that had to be repaired before it could resume patrols. Also, later intelligence reports confirm the presence of hostile forces, with six Viet Cong casualties from the incident.

Silver Star
Kerry's Silver Star medal has been called into question by George Elliott, Kerry's former commanding officer and a SBVT member. Elliott's stated position on the award changed during the course of the 2004 Presidential campaign.

Kerry's medal citation indicates that he charged into an ambush, killing an enemy preparing to launch a rocket. In his 1969 performance evaluation, Elliot wrote "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, LTJG [Lieutenant Junior Grade] Kerry was unsurpassed. He constantly reviewed tactics and lessons learned in river operations and applied his experience at every opportunity. On one occasion, while in tactical command of a three boat operation his units were taken under fire from ambush. LTJG Kerry rapidly assessed the situation and ordered his units to turn directly into the ambush. This decision resulted in routing the attackers with several KIA [Killed in Action]. LTJG Kerry emerges as the acknowledged leader in his peer group. His bearing and appearance are above reproach."

During Kerry's 1996 re-election campaign, Elliott responded to criticism of the medal, "The fact that he chased armed enemies down is not something to be looked down on." In June 2003, Elliott was quoted as saying the award was "well deserved" and that he had "no regrets or second thoughts at all about that."

More recently, however, Elliott has signed two affidavits that criticize the award. The first, in July 2004, stated in part, "When Kerry came back to the United States, he lied about what occurred in Vietnam..." After the release of this first affidavit, Michael Kranish of the Boston Globe quoted Elliott saying, "It was a terrible mistake probably for me to sign the affidavit with those words. I'm the one in trouble here...I knew it was wrong...In a hurry I signed it and faxed it back. That was a mistake."  Elliott contended that Kranish had substantially misquoted him, but the Globe stood by its account, calling the disputed quotes "absolutely accurate".

The story prompted Elliott to release a second affidavit, in August 2004, in which he stated, "Had I known the facts, I would not have recommended Kerry for the Silver Star for simply pursuing and dispatching a single wounded, fleeing Viet Cong." . The second affidavit made what Elliott called an "immaterial clarification", in that he admitted that he had no personal knowledge of the circumstances of the shooting. Rather, his initial statement that Kerry had been dishonest was based on unspecified sources and a passage contributed by Kranish to a biography of Kerry.

Kerry’s crew members who were there that day do not agree with Elliott’s characterization of the event. They contend that the enemy soldier, although wounded, was still a threat. For example, one of them, Fred Short said, "The guy was getting ready to stand up with a rocket on his shoulder, coming up. And Mr. Kerry took him out ... he would have been about a 30-yard shot. ... [T]here's no way he could miss us." Del Sandusky, Kerry’s second in command, described the consequences to the lightly armored Swift boat: "Charlie would have lit us up like a Roman candle because we're full of fuel, we're full of ammunition."

Another eyewitness, William Rood, now a Chicago Tribune editor, recently gave an account that supports Kerry's version of the events of that day. Rood was commander of PCF-23, which was one of the two Swift boats that accompanied Kerry's PCF-94.

Rood discounted several specific charges made by SBVT about the incident. In his (second-hand) book account, O'Neill implied that Kerry chased down a lone "teenager in a loincloth clutching a grenade launcher which may or may not have been loaded," without coming under enemy fire himself. In contrast, Rood stated that there were multiple attackers, there was heavy hostile fire, and the guerilla Kerry shot was "a grown man, dressed in the kind of garb the Viet Cong usually wore" armed with a "loaded B-40 rocket launcher". Also, O'Neill called Kerry's tactic of charging the beach "stupidity, not courage." Similarly, Hoffman characterized Kerry's actions as reckless and impulsive. However, Rood stated that Kerry's tactic of charging the beach was discussed and mutually agreed with the other boat commanders beforehand. He also notes that, at the time, Hoffman praised all three boat commanders and called the tactics developed "a shining example of completely overwhelming the enemy" and that they "may be the most efficacious method of dealing with small numbers of ambushers."  O'Neill responded that Rood's criticism was "extremely unfair" and stated that Rood's account of events is not substantially different from what appeared in his book, for which Rood had declined an interview.

Commenting on the Silver Star issue, Republican Sen. John Warner, who was Under Secretary of the Navy at the time, stated "We did extraordinary, careful checking on that type of medal, a very high one, when it goes through the secretary...I'd stand by the process that awarded that medal, and I think we best acknowledge that his heroism did gain that recognition."

Cambodia mission
One chapter of SBVT's forthcoming Unfit for Command questions Kerry's repeated statement that he was sent on an illegal, secret mission into Cambodia during Christmas December 25, 1968. On March 27, 1986, Kerry made a speech to the Senate that included the following passage:

 * Mr. President, I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the President of the United States telling the American people that I was not there: the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared—seared—in me.

Kerry indicated that this event was a turning point for him, causing him to distrust the United States government, and spurring his opposition to the war upon his return from Vietnam. At the time, President Lyndon Johnson had falsely denied military incursions across the Cambodian border. SBVT points out that, in a 1979 article in the Boston Herald, Kerry mistakenly identified the president in question as Richard Nixon. Nixon was actually president-elect at the time, and he had not yet issued his own false denial. None of Kerry's crewmates has confirmed ever being sent to Cambodia. Some have, however, stated that they may at some point have entered Cambodia without knowing it. James Wasser, who was on PCF-44 on that December mission, while saying that he believes they were "very, very close" to Cambodia, does not recall actually crossing over. Wasser acknowledged uncertainty, stating "I don't know exactly where we were. I didn't have the chart," and "It is very hard to tell. There are no signs." Michael Meehan, a spokesman for the Kerry campaign responded to SBVT's charges with a statement that Kerry was referring to a period when Nixon had been president-elect and before he was inaugurated. Meehan went on to state that Kerry had been "deep in enemy waters" between Vietnam and Cambodia and that his boat came under fire at the Cambodian border. Meehan also said that Kerry did covertly cross over into Cambodia to drop off special operations forces on a later occasion, but that there was no paperwork for such missions and he could not supply dates.

Based on examination of Kerry's journals and logbook, historian Douglas Brinkley placed the missions soon after Christmas. In an interview with the London Daily Telegraph, Brinkley stated "Kerry went into Cambodian waters three or four times in January and February 1969 on clandestine missions. He had a run dropping off U.S. Seals, Green Berets and CIA guys." Brinkley added, "He was a ferry master, a drop-off guy, but it was dangerous as hell. Kerry carries a hat he was given by one CIA operative. In a part of his journals which I didn't use he writes about discussions with CIA guys he was dropping off."

In the book, O'Neill argued that a Swift boat commander would have been "seriously disciplined or court-martialed" for crossing the Cambodian border. The book also asserts that border was impassible — posted with a large warning sign and patrolled by several PBR's precisely to prevent such crossings. Critics point out the inconsistency between this description and O'Neill's own claims documented in a conversation with President Nixon in 1971. O'Neill: "I was in Cambodia, sir. I worked along the border on the water." Nixon: "In a Swift boat?" O'Neill: Yes, sir."

Navy Inspector General Report on Medals
In September 2004, Vice Admiral Ronald A. Route, the Navy inspector general, completed a review of Kerry's combat medals, initiated at the request of Judicial Watch. In a memo to the Secretary of the Navy Gordon England, Route stated

 * ''Our examination found that existing documentation regarding the Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart medals indicates the awards approval process was properly followed. In particular, the senior officers who awarded the medals were properly delegated authority to do so. In addition, we found that they correctly followed the procedures in place at the time for approving these awards.

 * ''Conducting any additional review regarding events that took place over 30 years ago would not be productive. The passage of time would make reconstruction of the facts and circumstances unreliable, and would not allow the information gathered to be considered in the context of the time in which the events took place.

 * ''Our review also considered the fact that Senator Kerry's post-active duty activities were public and that military and civilian officials were aware of his actions at the time. For these reasons, I have determined that Senator Kerry's awards were properly approved and will take no further action in this matter.