text:
2006 Italian general election

The 2006 Italian general election was held on 9 and 10 April 2006. Romano Prodi, leader of the centre-left coalition The Union, narrowly defeated the incumbent Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, leader of the centre-right coalition House of Freedoms. Initial exit polls suggested a victory for Prodi, but the results narrowed as the count progressed. On 11 April 2006, Prodi declared victory; Berlusconi never conceded defeat and an ensuing dispute formed.

Preliminary results showed The Union leading the House of Freedoms in the Chamber of Deputies, with 340 seats to 277, thanks to obtaining a majority bonus (actual votes were distributed 49.81% to 49.74%). One more seat is allied with The Union (Aosta Valley) and 7 more seats in the foreign constituency. The House of Freedoms had secured a slight majority of Senate seats elected within Italy (155 seats to 154), but The Union won 4 of the 6 seats allocated to voters outside Italy, giving them control of both chambers.

On 19 April 2006, Italy's Supreme Court of Cassation ruled that Prodi had indeed won the election, winning control of the Chamber of Deputies by only 24,755 votes out of more than 38 million votes cast, and winning 158 seats in the Senate to 156 for Berlusconi's coalition. Even so, Berlusconi refused to concede defeat, claiming unproven electoral fraud.

Electoral campaign
During the election campaign, a political battle began between Romano Prodi, who led the centre-left coalition The Union and had been President of the European Commission from 1999 to 2004 and Prime Minister of Italy from 1996 to 1998. On the other hand, Silvio Berlusconi led the centre-right House of Freedoms; Berlusconi had been the incumbent Prime Minister since the 2001 general election, and had previously served as Prime Minister also in 1994 and 1995.

House of Freedoms
The House of Freedoms was the coalition supporting the incumbent government led by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, and mainly included the same parties as in the previous general election.

The New Italian Socialist Party (NPSI), a small social-democratic party composed of former members of the late Italian Socialist Party and led by former 1980s and 1990s minister Gianni De Michelis, which was part of the Berlusconi III Cabinet as a minister without portfolio, suffered a split on its last national congress (21 to 23 October 23, 2005), with a left-wing faction, led by Bobo Craxi, son of the late Bettino Craxi, who decided to immediately leave the House of Freedoms and unilaterally elected Craxi himself as new party leader. The NPSI contested the election with a joint list with the Christian Democracy for Autonomies.

As for the candidate who led the coalition into the general election, Berlusconi experienced an actual loss of support from Union of Christian and Centre Democrats (UDC), who asked for a return of the electoral law to a proportional system (which would most likely favour them) and a primary election to formally decide the alliance's candidate for Prime Minister. When the party list representation system was restored (albeit a form very different from the UDC proposal) and Marco Follini, critic of several reforms imposed by Berlusconi on the whole coalition, resigned from the UDC secretaryship, the possibility of a change of leadership inside the House of Freedoms was significantly reduced. On 27 October 2005, Lorenzo Cesa was appointed as new UDC secretary, becoming the successor of Follini himself. The coalition announced a "three-forwards" system, meaning that the Prime Ministerial candidate will be the political leader, among Casini, Fini and Berlusconi, whose party will win most votes. Since Berlusconi's party was known to be by far the largest one, it was understood that Berlusconi was the actual candidate.

One event which caused heavy criticism from the opposition was the support, sought and obtained by Berlusconi, of a number of fascist movements and parties, notably the Social Alternative of Alessandra Mussolini, granddaughter of the former dictator of Italy, and Luca Romagnoli, a holocaust denier. Supporters of Berlusconi responded to this pointing to the presence in The Union of two communist parties, which had among their candidates anarchist activist Francesco Caruso and a transgender person, Vladimir Luxuria.

The Union
The Olive Tree coalition, expression of the Italian centre-left, was expanded as The Union, and led for the election by former Prime Minister and former President of the European Commission Romano Prodi, who had already beaten Berlusconi in the 1996 general election. Prodi's candidacy was confirmed by a national primary election, held on 16 October 2005. The former coalition was enlarged in order to cover the whole ensemble of Italian centre-left to left-wing factions.

The Rose in the Fist was officially founded on 25 September 2005, when the Italian Radicals, a libertarian-influenced party, officially declared an alliance with the Italian Democratic Socialists (SDI) in the form of a confederation, with explicit references to the politics of Tony Blair, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero and Loris Fortuna, an Italian politician in the 1970s who became famous for his laicist proposals, and is considered the father of the law on divorce. This confederation immediately caused a stir for not having signed the political platform of The Union, being the only centre-left party not to do that; the Rose in the Fist, represented by Emma Bonino in the final platform meeting, in fact protested about insufficient mentions of social issues such as legalisation of civil unions. The Socialists, led by Bobo Craxi, who were the breakaway left wing of the New Italian Socialist Party which emerged the House of Freedoms, was supposed to join the Rose in the Fist confederation, but instead reorganised itself in a single party, which however failed to get over the 2% of national votes. However, Bobo Craxi was able to enter in the Lower House, as he was one of the leading candidates for The Olive Tree in Lombardy.

The Union is also supported by a number of minor parties and movements, although of those only the Pensioners' Party has any elected representation (1 Member of European Parliament).

Debates
For some time, Silvio Berlusconi had challenged Romano Prodi to a debate on national television. Prodi, however, said he would accept only if certain rules had been set. Possibly because he thought he was behind in the polls, Berlusconi saw the debate as a chance to turn the tables, and accused Prodi of fleeing from him. It is notable that, in the 2001 elections, it was Berlusconi who refused to meet the centre-left candidate, Francesco Rutelli.

Two televised debates were set by the Parliamentary Committee of Inspection on RAI, which had the goal of ensuring equal treatment for the two political sides. However, Prodi contested the deliberation of this Committee, which allowed Berlusconi to also hold a final televised speech after the debates as Prime Minister. Prodi refused to participate in any debate until this final speech had been cancelled. The issue was resolved on 3 March, when Berlusconi finally agreed to cancel the final speech.

The debates lasted about 90 minutes each, did not include commercials, and had a preset time for each answer and each reply, and the obligation to film only the speaking person at any given time. The candidates were also forbidden to bring any kind of notes with them, even though they could write some down during the debate, and no audience was allowed to participate. This set of rules was very unusual in Italian political talk shows, where politicians usually interrupt each other, talk simultaneously and for as long as they can hold the word. Questions to candidates are posted by two journalists from the Italian press: the moderator himself was not allowed to ask any questions, but only to present the debate and guarantee respect of the rules. At the end of the debates, the candidates are allowed to make a final statement of 3 minutes.

The first televised debate, held on 14 March, was broadcast live on Rai Uno, and moderated by Clemente Mimun, Director of TG1. It featured questions from journalists Roberto Napoletano of Il Messaggero and Marcello Sorgi of La Stampa. It was watched by over 16 million people, a record for a political TV show. During his final speech, Berlusconi, who often overran his intervention times, attacked the rules of the debate, in his opinion too strict, whereas Prodi praised them, pointing out the fact that they are used in US debates this way, as well. Some observers commented that Berlusconi had been disappointing in this debate, scribbling nervously while he was talking and at a point confusing Iran and Iraq; while all politicians claimed their candidate had won the debate, it was generally agreed that Berlusconi had not dealt a strong blow to Prodi.

The second debate, moderated by Bruno Vespa, an Italian journalist and anchorman, was held on April 3 and broadcast live on Rai Uno, featuring questions from Napoletano and Sorgi (same journalists of the first debate). It was dominated by the economic proposals and was more intense, with much stronger tones between Prodi and Berlusconi. In this debate, Berlusconi had the possibility of making the final 3-minute statement: in this time, he delivered his "surprise blow" proposing the abolition of ICI, a local tax on real estate whose money belongs to local city councils.

Later on, it turned out that Berlusconi's proposal was not completely agreed upon in the rest of the House of Freedoms, and Prodi, immediately after the debate, noted "about ICI, I want to know what the centre-right mayors think about".

The Union
After a long discussion, the centre-left coalition released its official platform on 10 February 2006, and presented it to the public the next day. However, the Rose in the Fist refused to sign it in, because it did not explicitly include some issues, such as civil unions and LGBT rights. The platform has been criticised by the House of Freedoms because of its 281-page length.

A reduced, more readable, version of the official political platform was released by the coalition, in order to answer the critics from the centre-right coalition.

The main points of the centre-left platform were:
 * More safety, by moving police resources from immigration and escort issues to the control of the territory;
 * Controlled immigration and promotion of legal ways to immigrate in Italy;
 * A quicker and more reliable judicial system;
 * Full condemnation and fight of dodging and regularisation of concealed labour;
 * More integration with the European Union;
 * Recognition of rights for civil, unmarried couples;
 * Immediate withdrawal of the Italian troops in Iraq;
 * Numerical restraint and regulation of the typologies of flexible labour;
 * Reduction of taxes on work by 5% (often referred to as the fiscal wedge), to be financed by increased policing activity against tax dodgers;
 * Increase in taxes on temporary work positions to encourage permanent employment.

House of Freedoms
The platform of the House of Freedoms was released on 25 February. It was 22 pages long, and it was defined as the continuance of the first five years of centre-right government. It is different by the contract with Italians (just five basic points) which characterised the 2001 general election. It was criticised as "vague" and "propaganda".

The main points of the centre-right platform were:
 * Increase of fiscal autonomy for Regions (federalismo fiscale, fiscal federalism);
 * Realisation of the so-called grandi opere (big works), notably the Strait of Messina Bridge;
 * Support for smaller and family companies, and the Made in Italy export goods business;
 * Tax reduction;
 * Consolidation of relationships with the USA and reaffirmation of the commitment to the European Union;
 * Defence of the values of family as based on marriage;
 * Rise of legal penalties for criminal offences;
 * Keeping up with the current politics for creating jobs, especially for the young Italians and the women;
 * Restrictions on immigration

Opinion polling
According to the opinion polls released, mainly commissioned for national newspapers, magazines and TV stations, The Union was clearly leading the race to the general election. The three surveys which show a majority of votes for the House of Freedoms were all commissioned by Berlusconi's party Forza Italia. Notably, the surveys of Penn, Schoen & Berland, a U.S. research firm, were commissioned by Berlusconi because he claimed the national surveys to be politically biased.

According to the Italian par condicio law, it is forbidden to publish any opinion polling in the 15 days which precede the election (25 March, in this case).

The final result (49.8% Union vs 49.7% House of Freedoms) was about 3% different from almost all polls (including all the exit polls) reducing the expected 5% gap between the coalition to a difference of about 0.1%. On Italian TV some tried to explain this discrepancy claiming that some House of Freedoms voters were ashamed to admit that they planned to vote for them. Others claimed that the last week of electoral campaign, dominated by Berlusconi's proposal of cutting ICI and by the media's insistence on the alleged new taxes advocated by The Union, persuaded a large number of Italians, usually uninterested to politics, to cast a vote for the House of Freedoms.

Election date
In July 2005, President Carlo Azeglio Ciampi asked current PM Silvio Berlusconi about the opportunity for an early election for the first half of April 2006, in order to prevent a big political deadlock (the mandate of President Ciampi himself would be over in May 2006 and a newly elected government was not likely be in office within three weeks). Berlusconi however refused the deal, claiming he would stay in office until the due date of his term.

But, on 18 October, Berlusconi announced that the election would be held on 9 April 2006, eventually following the suggestions from President Ciampi. Berlusconi also announced that the next administrative elections (which include the mayoral elections of Rome, Milan and Naples) will be held in May, the day after Romano Prodi had asked to vote for all elections the same day, in April. Berlusconi stated this was due to his fear that good government by centre-left mayors could favour the centre-left in the general election. Critics say holding all elections on the same day could save millions of euros in public expenditure.

Par condicio law
One of the main topics that was relevant for this general election was the par condicio law. Its name, in Latin, means 'equal treatment'; a special law which guarantees all the main majority and opposition political forces to have equal media treatment, in terms of times and spaces, and, furthermore, denies political commercials for TV and radio outside some dedicated transmissions.

Berlusconi had declared several times that he wants the par condicio law to be either repealed or at least changed in a much lighter way. Critics and opponents said that Berlusconi's willingness to have the law abolished were dictated by his almost complete control of 6 channels (his family holding company controls Mediaset, which broadcasts three national private channels, and controls indirectly, as Head of Government, the three RAI public broadcasting channels).

In his latter government years, Berlusconi attempted to accelerate his desires; however UDC, who is part of the Berlusconi government, declared several times its opposition to either abolish or change the par condicio law, with secretary Lorenzo Cesa, after his election as party leader, who pointed out his refusal of any change of the law.

The law however did not prevent Berlusconi from using his TV channels of Mediaset, and even SMS via cellphones, to manage to get more votes. During the election day Berlusconi's channels aired a lot of messages to remind people who were watching his TV channels to use their vote together with spots saying "Mediaset gives you everything without asking for anything in return". While these spots didn't break the par condicio law, it was broken by some of the journalists (especially Emilio Fede, well known for his political ideas) of the Berlusconi's channels and in March and April 2006, the Autorità per le Garanzie nelle Comunicazioni fined twice his privately owned channels for violation of the par condicio law, the biggest fine to date (300,000 €).

Tax breaks
Before winning the 2001 general election and becoming Prime Minister of Italy, Berlusconi signed in a TV show a Contract with Italians, where he promised, if elected, to fulfil at least four of the five points included in it. One of the main points regarded a tax break for income levels, whereas The Olive Tree policy was essentially to maintain a progressive taxation system.

The generalised tax break was somewhat enacted in 2005, and included in the last Financial Measure. The opposition blamed Berlusconi for doing the tax break in one of the worst economic periods for the country, with no coverage for the resulting debt, and accused Berlusconi's allies of accepting the tax break in return for better power positions; during the negotiations for the Financial Measure, the National Alliance leader, and, at that date, vice-premier, Gianfranco Fini, was moved to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs, and UDC leader Marco Follini, who had no ministerial role before that date, was chosen to replace Fini.

In the electoral campaign, Berlusconi and the whole centre-right coalition almost daily criticised the left, alleging that Prodi would increase taxes if elected, pointing out the centre-left proposal to have a 5% cut of the tax wedge.

Taxes became the main topic for the end of the electoral campaign, with Berlusconi citing Prodi would reintroduce the inheritance tax, abrogated in 2001, and increase the tax system on treasury bills (BOT, CCT) and would tax stockmarket trading. Prodi pointed out the fact that he would reintroduce the inheritance tax only for the very rich people, and would not increase the taxes on treasury bills.

Foreign reputation
A good friend of George W. Bush and Vladimir Putin, Berlusconi supported the American invasion of Iraq, and, during the Italian EU presidency, suggested to Chairman of the PES Group in the European Parliament Martin Schulz, during a talk, a role of kapo (concentration-camp inmate appointed as supervisor) for a hypothetical movie, claiming he would be "perfect" for the role. When Berlusconi entered the Strasburg Parliament he was welcomed with posters in various languages addressing him as "Godfather of Europe", explicitly referring to Francis Ford Coppola's cinematic series about the mafia, without respecting his high institutional role as EU Council president. Afterwards Mr Berlusconi exploded at the insisting questions of MP Schulz. This diplomatic incident cooled down the Italy-Germany foreign relations for a period. Eventually a phone call between the Prime Minister and German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder put an end to the dispute.

In 2001 Berlusconi declared Western civilisation to be "superior to Islam", which he was very much criticised for. But in particular the international English-speaking press, such as Financial Times and Newsweek, criticized Berlusconi's work. Several times, before and after his election as prime minister, the weekly worldwide magazine The Economist accused Berlusconi of being essentially "unfit to lead Italy".

New voting rights for Italians living abroad
For the first time in Italian history, Italian citizens living abroad were able to vote by postal ballot (without having to physically return to Italy to cast their vote) for 12 deputies and 6 senators who will represent them in the Italian Parliament, an unusual system that was supported by Silvio Berlusconi and promoted by Mirko Tremaglia. These parliamentary seats are organised into four constituencies (Europe, North & Central America, Latin America, and Africa/Asia/Oceania). Candidates must live in their respective constituencies.

Forty-two percent of eligible voters abroad participated in the elections. Prodi's The Union managed to secure 4 of the 6 Senate seats, while Berlusconi's Forza Italia and an Independent candidate each gained 1 of the remaining 2 seats, aiding Prodi in gaining a majority in the Italian Senate. In the House of Deputies, 7 seats went to The Union, 4 to Berlusconi's coalition, and one to an Independent candidate. In North America, candidates from Toronto and Chicago were elected to the House of Deputies while the candidate from New York City was elected to the Senate.

Berlusconi claimed, in challenging the election results, that there were irregularities in the vote abroad. The result of the vote may have been influenced by the fact that numerous right-wing parties put forward candidates in the constituencies abroad, while there were few centre-left candidates, thereby splitting the centre-right vote. This tactical error may be explained through the novelty of the vote abroad.

Voting rights for Italians living abroad prior to 2006
Italian citizens living outside of Italy have always had the De Jure right to vote in all referendums and elections being held in Italy (provided they had registered their residence abroad with their relevant consulate). However until late 2001, any citizen wishing to vote, was required to physically return to the city or town in Italy where he or she was registered on the electoral roll. The only exception to this rule was for the Italian elections to the european parliament in which voters could cast their ballot at their nearest consulate but only if they had their residence in one of the other 14 European Union nations.

Until 2001 the Italian Republic offered citizens living abroad a free return train journey to their home town in Italy in order to vote, however the portion of the train journey that was free of charge was only on Italian soil. Any costs incurred in getting from their place of residence abroad to the Italian border had to be covered by the citizen wanting to vote, therefore a free return train journey was hardly an incentive for the large Italian communities living as far away as in the United States, Argentina or Australia. For this reason very few Italians abroad made use of this right to vote, unless they lived in cities and towns that bordered to Italy such as in Germany, Switzerland, France and Austria. Various Italian minorities living abroad (notably in the United States) protested frequently at this lack of political representation especially if they paid taxes on property owned in Italy.

After numerous years of petitioning and fierce debate, the Italian Parliament, in late 2001, finally passed a constitutional law allowing Italian citizens living abroad to vote in elections in Italy by postal ballot. The change was the result of a thirty-year struggle to recognise the rights and special interests of Italians who have migrated abroad but retained their Italian identity.

Italians wishing to excise this right must first register their residence abroad with their relevant consulate.

Constitutional reform
During the last few months of 2004, the House of Freedoms coalition proposed a large reform of the current Italian Constitution, which was formulated in 1948. It proposes several changes to the current political system: it reduces the number of MPs from about 950 to 750, it gives more power to the prime minister (no longer called president of the council), there will be no possibility to express a vote of no confidence against the prime minister without indicating his successor (similar to Germany's constructive vote of no confidence); it puts an end to the necessity of a law being approved by both Chambers, attributing a clear competence to each of them; it gives more power to the regions, with several references to devolution, the main programme point of the Northern League, still guaranteeing, according to the new version of article 127, the national interest, which had been cancelled by the previous reform of the left.

The Italian Constitution prescribes that both chambers must accept every modification to the constitution twice within three months, and, if it passes with less than two thirds of the votes at the second scrutiny, a national referendum on the modification can be held (the reform will make it always possible to call such a referendum). Since the centre-left opposition opposed to the new constitutional reform, describing it as "dangerous", "separatist", and "antidemocratic", the first procedural step, that is, the approval by the Chamber of Deputies, was done successfully in October 2004, but with less than two-thirds of the lower-house votes, making possible the confirmative referendum. The second favourable polling, in Senate, was done in March 2005, whereas the third one occurred on October 20. During the third polling, former UDC leader Marco Follini announced he would abstain from the final vote, not support anymore the constitutional reform, followed by his party fellow Bruno Tabacci.

On November 17, the Senate approved the constitutional reform in its final instance; Northern League leader Umberto Bossi attended the discussion and the voting, returning to the Parliament, even if just as spectator, after his illness. During the vote, Domenico Fisichella announced his opposition to the reform, and his immediate resignation from the party, going against the party line about the issue. Italian MPs quite easily change party and even coalition: in the legislature between 1996 and 2001 15% of MPs did so.

The House of Freedoms' proposal of constitutional reform has been done in a unilateral way - no agreement with the opposition, whereas the current Italian Constitution was written after World War II by all the national political forces (except the fascists), ranging from Liberals, to Christian Democrats, to Socialists, to Communists and others. According to the House of Freedom, this policy was adopted in order to correct the constitutional reform approved by the former centre-left majority in 2001 (Constitutional law 3/2001) with the same modus - no agreement with the opposition. However, the new reform deeply modifies constitutional system of Italy, while the 2001 reform just partially modified a section of the Constitution.

The national referendum, requested by the centre-left opposition and a number of associations and regions - even by the centre-right ruled Lombardy, has been kept on 25–26 June 2006 and it has been concluded with the refusal of the constitutional reform by 61.32% of voting.

2005 regional elections
On 3 and 4 April 2005, regional elections were held in 13 Italian regions (the election in Basilicata was put off for two weeks because of irregularities). The final result actually reversed the political scenario of Italy, with the opposition centre-left coalition The Union winning in 11 regions, while the governing centre-right coalition House of Freedoms maintaining only two of the eight regions they were ruling before the election. These results have brought some right-wing members, including vice-premier Marco Follini, to ask for early national election.

Centre-left primary election
On 16 October 2005, a primary election was held to officially declare the one and only candidate for the centre-left coalition The Union. Over four million voters have participated to the election.

Major candidate Romano Prodi, who has been one of the main supporters of the primary election, gained a clear win, obtaining about 75% of the votes and defeating Communist Refoundation Party leader Fausto Bertinotti, Green Alfonso Pecoraro Scanio, former magistrate Antonio Di Pietro, Catholic centrist Clemente Mastella, independent candidate Ivan Scalfarotto and far-left candidate Simona Panzino. The election was also opened to non-Italian official residents, even if they will not be eligible to vote for the general election.

Economic issues
Italy was the only European country in which there is an almost-zero rate of growth in economy, and one of the highest debts in the whole EU, which brought Berlusconi to ask successfully to have the Treaty of Maastricht parameters relaxed. This led to several critics of the Berlusconi's policy on economy, strictly linked to the work of the Italian Ministry of Economy of Giulio Tremonti, which was forced to resign in 2004 after heavy protests from parties of his own coalition, especially the National Alliance, and returned to his previous cabinet position one year later, following the resignation of Domenico Siniscalco; Tremonti's work for trying to fill the cash deficit was often based on amnesties for infringement of tax and building regulations. Prodi and the centre-left often criticised that facet of the Italian centre-right.

Job security
The regulation of temporary employment was first introduced as "pacchetto Treu" during the 1996–2001 centre-left government. It was then changed by Minister of Labour Roberto Maroni in 2003, introducing a high number of temporary labour forms and made temporary labour cheaper than permanent.

The centre-left heavily criticised the current law, claiming it has damaged the future of the younger people. More recently, Prodi defined the current labour law as "much worse than French CPE".

The centre-left has proposed to put temporary and permanent job costs on the same level, contain the number of temporary labour forms, and regulate internships.

Electoral system
Since 1994 and 2001 general elections, Italy had a mixed electoral system, with 75% of the seats assigned through a plurality voting system, and 25% through a proportional one.

The Italian Chamber of Deputies has 630 seats, the Senate 315 (exactly half).

Approval of a new voting system
A white paper for a proportional-only electoral system was presented to the Chamber of Deputies on 13 September 2005, only seven months before the 2006 general election. This reform, strongly backed by the centrist Union of Christian and Centre Democrats (UDC), proposed a 4% threshold before a party gained any seats, and a majority bonus of at least 340 seats for the winning coalition, the total votes for each coalition being the sum of the votes of those coalition parties which had won at least 4% of the national votes. The new proposal was approved by parliament.

An electoral survey published on 15 September 2005 by the national left newspaper La Repubblica claimed that, with the initial proposal of electoral reform become law, the House of Freedoms would win the next elections 340–290, even if they won only 45% of votes and the opposition coalition The Union won 50% because The Union also includes several small parties with less than 4% of national votes. This could have been avoided if the small opposition parties ran on a common ticket. Aim of this bill of reform was to reduce the number of parties, and particularly the moderate centre-left would have taken advantage in respect to the smaller radical left parties.

The UDC, commenting on the proposal, asked for the abolition of the 4% cut-off clause, whereas the National Alliance did not show any favour to this attempt of reform, with its leader Gianfranco Fini claiming to want first to vote for the constitutional reform, and then for the new voting system, on condition that the 4% cut-off were not repealed.

This proposal of law was strongly questioned by the opposition coalition, who defined it an "attempted coup". Opposition leader Romano Prodi said it was "totally unacceptable". Several newspapers politically oriented to the left nicknamed the electoral system proposal by the House of Freedoms as "Truffarellum", after "truffa" (Italian for "fraud") and the "Mattarellum", (from Sergio Mattarella), the most common name for the previous Italian electoral law (there is a recent custom to nickname new electoral systems by a somewhat Latinised version of the name of the lawmaker; another one is the system used in regional elections, the so-called "Tatarellum" from Pinuccio Tatarella).

Notably, some smaller opposition parties, such as Communist Refoundation Party and Union of Democrats for Europe (UDEUR), supported a proportional electoral law; nevertheless, they declared they were against an electoral reform by this parliament because the current law would be changed too close to the 2006 general election.

The Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi had previously been a strong supporter of the plurality-based electoral law; in 1995, talking about his coalition, he defined the plurality principle as "our religion".

A modified version of the first proposal, this time with a 2% threshold for entering parliament and without vote of preference for candidates but still without the support of the opposition, was presented to the Chamber of Deputies. The voting count started on 11 October 2005; the lower house of the Italian Parliament then approved the electoral reform on 14 October. The new electoral was then eventually approved on December 16, 2005, and countersigned by President Ciampi on 23 December 2005.

Roberto Calderoli, the main author of this electoral reform, defined this law "a rascality" (using the mildly vulgar term "porcata"). Ironically, the new electoral law allowed Prodi to count on a large majority in the Chamber and to obtain majority in the Senate, where the House of Freedoms had more votes (49.88% vs. 49.18% for The Union).

Results by region (except Aosta Valley)
Source: Interior Ministry of Italy, Votes, Seats

Distribution of seats
Seat totals by constituency. As this is a MB election, seat totals are determined by the national popular vote, benefiting the largest coalition nationwide.

Italy (except Aosta Valley and Trentino-Alto Adige)
Source: Interior Ministry of Italy, Votes, Seats

Note: 7 Senators for life: Francesco Cossiga (Former Italian President), Oscar Luigi Scalfaro (Former Italian President), Giulio Andreotti (Former Italian Prime Minister), Rita Levi Montalcini (Nobel Prize winner for Medicine 1986), Emilio Colombo (Former Italian Prime Minister), Giorgio Napolitano (Former President of Italian Chamber of Deputies and Minister of the Interior), Sergio Pininfarina.

Map
Seat totals by constituency. As this is a MB election, seat totals are determined by the national popular vote, benefiting the largest coalition in each region.

Vote count controversy
Although The Union led initial exit polls and was quickly expected to win the election, the gap with House of Freedoms narrowed as the votes were tabulated. The initial results released by the Interior Ministry showed that Prodi had won the Chamber of Deputies by 25,204 votes, and Prodi declared victory on 11 April. Berlusconi, however, refused to concede, requesting a recount on 43,028 Chamber ballots and 39,822 Senate ballots. Berlusconi also claimed problems with the votes from Italian citizens abroad, which were critical in giving The Union a majority in the Senate. Five ballot boxes were also found on the streets in Rome after the election. On 14 April, however, the Interior Ministry announced that there had been a mistake in the report of the number of ballots to be rechecked. Only 2,131 Chamber ballots and 3,135 Senate ballots merited re-examination (reducing the total number of disputed ballots from the over 80,000 initially reported to just over 5,000). The result of this check added equally a few hundred votes to each coalition. Analysts also believed that the vote from abroad was so overwhelmingly in favour of The Union that the election would be highly unlikely to be overturned in Berlusconi's favour.

The last ruling of the supreme court ("Corte di Cassazione") on 19 April 2006 stated that Prodi won the election by 24,755 votes.

title: 2006 Italian general election


text:
User talk:Aniles.revni

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 02:46, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Image Tagging for Image:Qxql3q2oa.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Qxql3q2oa.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 12:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:8318116ys.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:8318116ys.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 10:02, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Aniles.revni


text:
User talk:Kwake~enwiki

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 02:47, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Kwake. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Kwake~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 01:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kwake~enwiki


text:
User talk:Bobbyandck

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 02:49, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

User categorisation
You were listed on the Wikipedians/Switzerland page as living in or being associated with Switzerland. As part of the User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians in Switzerland for instructions. --Army1987 12:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:West-highland-way.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:West-highland-way.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then 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 images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Admrb♉ltz (T | C) 04:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bobbyandck


text:
Introduction to Destruction

Introduction to Destruction is Sum 41's first DVD. It was released in 2001.

Contents
The DVD contains film of a sold-out live concert at the Astoria in London and all available music videos at the time including outtakes, commentary and behind the scenes features. In addition, there are five home movies Sum 41 when they were in grade 11, five feature films (with optional commentary), photographs and a special "hidden" weblink (which is no longer in service).

Astoria show track listing

 * 1) "Motivation"
 * 2) "Nothing On My Back"
 * 3) "Makes No Difference"
 * 4) "Rhythms"
 * 5) "In Too Deep"
 * 6) "All She's Got"
 * 7) "Handle This"
 * 8) "Machine Gun"
 * 9) "Crazy Amanda Bunkface"
 * 10) "It's What We're All About"
 * 11) "Fat Lip"

title: Introduction to Destruction


text:
Mamdouh Habib

Mamdouh Habib (born 3 June 1955) is an Egyptian and Australian citizen with dual nationality, best known for having been held for more than three years by the United States as an enemy combatant, by both the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and military authorities. He was sent by extraordinary rendition from Pakistan to Egypt after his arrest. He was held the longest at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp as an enemy combatant. Finally released without charges in January 2005, Habib struggled to have his account of his experiences believed, as he alleged he had been tortured by the CIA, Egyptians, and US military, at times with Australian intelligence officers present. For some time, each of the governments denied his allegations, but they have gradually been confirmed.

Arrested after the 9/11 attacks in 2001 during a trip to Pakistan and Afghanistan, Habib was interrogated there by Pakistani and United States CIA agents before being shipped to Egypt, where he was held for six months and interrogated under torture. The CIA transferred him back to a black site in Afghanistan for more torture and interrogation, then to US military custody. In 2002 Habib was transferred to the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. He continued to be held without charges and suffered coercive interrogation.

The United States accused Habib of having had knowledge of the 11 September 2001 attacks, training the hijackers, staying at an al-Qaeda safe house in Afghanistan, conducting surveillance, helping to transfer chemical weapons, and planning to hijack the aircraft used in the 11 September attacks. He confessed to many acts under torture, but there was no evidence to support these claims.

With legal support, Habib filed for a writ of habeas corpus to challenge his detention. His case of Habib v. Bush was one of two consolidated under Rasul v. Bush (2004). The United States Supreme Court ruled in it that US courts had jurisdiction over Guantanamo and that detainees had the right to challenge their detentions in US courts. Following an article in The Washington Post about Habib's being taken by extraordinary rendition and held secretly in Egypt, the United States decided to release him without charges in January 2005. After Habib returned to Australia in January 2005, officials eventually acknowledged that he "knew nothing about terrorism".

Habib filed suit against the Australian government for cooperating with the United States in his detention and coercive interrogations. In November 2008, Habib published a memoir co-written with Julia Collingwood, My Story: The Tale of a Terrorist Who Wasn't, detailing his experiences. In December 2010, an Egyptian official confirmed Habib's account of his torture in Egypt having been witnessed by an Australian officer, whom he named. The Australian government made an out-of-court settlement in the suit by Habib.

Life
Mamdouh Habib was born on 3 June 1955 in Alexandria, Egypt, where he grew up in a Muslim family. He moved at the age of 24 to Australia in 1980, to join his older brother and sister, who had settled there and urged him to come. He lived and worked in Sydney and became a citizen.

Through his brother's wife, he met her sister, Maha. They married and have had four children, including twin sons.

He worked running a coffee shop and also taught classes and students in Islam. He is a dual citizen of Egypt and Australia. He also worked as a taxi driver.

In the fall of 2001, Habib was arrested in Pakistan. He was held for what was a total of more than three years. After being released in January 2005 without charge by the United States and returned to Australia, Habib encountered difficulties: his passport was revoked and even in 2006, he could not obtain one. The government advised him he would be under surveillance and was still considered a risk.

Habib told his account numerous times to media: he said that he had been interrogated about supposed terrorist activities while under torture in Pakistan, taken to Egypt and interrogated under torture there, transferred to United States military custody in Afghanistan, and transported to Guantanamo Bay detention camp, where he suffered extended solitary confinement, more interrogation and torture. He said that Australian officers had been present at some of these occasions. After the Australian government was notified of his detention in Guantanamo, he was interrogated there by an ASIO agent, who he says threatened him and his family. The torture and Australian witness were denied by the respective governments, and Egypt denied he had been held in the country.

He filed suit against the Australian government for cooperating in his detention and treatment. In December 2010, an Egyptian officer confirmed his story of coercive interrogation in Egypt, with an Australian witness, and said the sessions had been videotaped. Soon after that, the Australian government settled with Habib in a confidential settlement out-of-court, as reported by the Sydney Morning Herald in February 2011.

Later, in 2007, Habib entered politics. He ran as an independent political candidate in the 2007 New South Wales state election. Receiving less than 5% in his electorate in a secure Labor district, he did not gain a seat.

1990s
When Habib's case was being heard by the US Supreme Court, in 2004 the ABC current affairs program, Four Corners, featured him as the subject of a program. It said that in the 1990s, the Australian Defence Housing Authority took out an "apprehended violence" order against him. DHA claimed that Habib had made a threatening phone call following the cancellation of a contract with the organisation. Habib says this was nothing more than an argument over a contract. In court his psychiatrist had testified that Habib was suffering from major depression at the time and was being treated with Prozac, but that he was not prone to violence. A witness described his irritability and sadness but said he was not aggressive or violent.

According to Four Corners, in early 2001, at a meeting with police, Habib was described by them as showing "signs of hostility towards government organisations and the community generally". Asked to do "a detailed threat assessment," the Protective Services Group concluded there was no evidence to support concerns that Habib might commit an act of violence. The police decided Habib was "a repetitious and vexatious complainant" with "little credibility."

2001 to 2005 imprisonment: Pakistan, Egypt, Afghanistan, Cuba
Habib claims he became disaffected with Australia, and traveled to Pakistan and Afghanistan in 2001 to find an Islamic school to educate his children. He was arrested in Pakistan in October 2001 while traveling by bus to Karachi, Pakistan. The bus was stopped by local police who arrested Habib and two Germans. The two German citizens were released shortly thereafter. The Four Corners program stated that the two Germans were asked whether they had seen Habib, and whether he had told them that he had been in Afghanistan. They said nothing that incriminated Habib; one replied; "No. I didn't see him in the camps I was in. Nor did he tell us that he had been in a training camp."

After questioning by Pakistani and CIA officers, Habib was transported in custody by extraordinary rendition to Egypt, his country of origin. There he was held for 5 months and questioned before being transferred to US military custody and imprisoned in Afghanistan. A Pentagon spokesman said at the time that Habib was a terrorist who had spent his time across the border in Afghanistan, "either supporting hostile forces, or on the battlefield fighting illegally against the U.S." following its entry in the fall of 2001.

Australian government authorities alleged that while Habib had been in Afghanistan, he took an advanced al-Qaeda training course in a camp near Kabul. It claimed that the course included surveillance and photographing facilities, the establishment and use of safe houses, covert travel and writing secret reports. Australian authorities say that several other men who took part in the course identified Habib as having been there. Evidence to support these claims was not made public.

The CIA sent Habib back to Egypt by extraordinary rendition, where he claims he was held and interrogated under torture for five months. He claims his Egyptian captors allegedly shocked him with high-voltage wires, hung him from metal hooks on walls, and beat him. In 2005 an Egyptian official said that he could not comment on these specific allegations, but added that accusations that the Egyptian government was torturing people "tend to be mythology". The claims have been substantiated by other witnesses and Moazzam Begg, a British citizen and former detainee at Guantanamo who founded Cageprisoners, an organization representing detainees.

"They outsource torture," said Stephen Hopper, Habib's Australian lawyer, referring to the practices of the United States. "You get your friends and allies to do your dirty work for you." Habib has said that some of his interrogators in Pakistan had recognizable American accents, and that one had a tattoo of an American flag on his arm.

In 2002, the US transported Habib from Egypt to Guantanamo Bay, where he was detained for two years. During detention, Habib confessed to a litany of terrorism-related crimes, including teaching martial arts to several of the September 11 hijackers and planning a hijacking. After release, in 2005 Habib insisted that his confessions were false and given under "duress and torture."

Mamdouh Ibrahim Ahmed Habib v. George Bush
A writ of habeas corpus, Mamdouh Ibrahim Ahmed Habib v. George Bush, was submitted on Mamdouh Ibrahim Ahmed Habib's behalf. In response, on 1 October 2004, the Department of Defense released 63 pages of unclassified documents related to his Combatant Status Review Tribunal. On 20 September 2004, his "enemy combatant" status was confirmed by Tribunal panel 6.

2005 on: release and post-release
On 11 January 2005, the day before his charges were scheduled to be laid by the military commission, Dana Priest at The Washington Post published a front-page article of Habib's account of his experiences, including his extraordinary rendition to Egypt and torture there and at Guantanamo Bay detention camp. Later that day, the United States government announced that it would not be charging Habib, and would release him to Australia. The Australian Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock announced that Habib would be repatriated within days.

The Australian government chartered a special plane (for approximately $500,000) to fly Habib home because the US would not allow him to travel on a regular commercial flight. US officials insisted he be shackled during the flight. Habib returned to Australia on 28 January 2005.

Return to Australia
After his return, in January 2005, Habib filed suit against the Australian government for its cooperation with the United States, alleging that he was beaten and humiliated in Pakistan after his arrest. He also alleged that an Australian official was present at some of these interrogations, but the Australian Government denied this. Habib claims to have been suspended to a ceiling by his arms, standing atop a barrel drum, and that when he gave an answer his Pakistani interrogators didn't believe, they would jolt him with electricity until he fainted. Habib also alleged that at Guantanamo, he suffered both mental and physical abuse: for instance, interrogators told him that his family had been killed, and he was tied to the ground while a prostitute threw menstrual blood on him.

(Note: It is now known that in August 2002, the Office of Legal Counsel, United States Department of Justice, issued three documents of legal opinion to the CIA, which have come to be called the Torture Memos, narrowly defining torture and authorizing certain enhanced interrogation techniques, and another in March 2003 to DOD. Such techniques, commonly classified as torture, were adopted by the CIA and DOD.)

At the time, the Australian Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, publicly challenged Habib's claims, saying "no evidence has been found to prove that torture has been used at the camp." Since that time, there have been numerous allegations and documentation of torture by former detainees at Guantanamo. In addition, in the spring of 2004, the Abu Ghraib prisoner torture and abuse scandal in Iraq had captured media attention, showing that excesses had been committed against prisoners under US military supervision. In spring 2004, one of the "Torture Memos" was leaked to the press, which gave insight into the legal opinions being promulgated in the George W. Bush administration.

In February 2005, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation interviewed Christopher Tennant, the director of Sydney University's Psychological medicine unit. Having examined Habib after his return, Tennant said:
 * "He [Habib] showed me marks on his back, he showed me cigarette burns on his body, and the subsequent examination by another professor of medicine, more expert in physical examination than me, confirmed that he's got skin discolouration on his right loin which would be consistent with old bruising, which in turn would be consistent with beating..."
 * "Well, the main feature of the medical report from Guantanamo was that he had had repeatedly blood in his urine, which is a very significant symptom and a worrying symptom, and that was consistent with his reports both to me and to the specialist physician who also examined him, and was consistent with the fact that, on examination, he had evidence of discolouration to his skin on his right loin, just over his kidney, which in turn was consistent with old bruising and possibly due to being beaten."

Australian officials revoked Habib's passport, saying he remained under suspicion. They warned him that his activities would be constantly monitored to ensure he does not become a security threat. He was not charged and remained relatively free. His records from Guantanamo Bay, released in a WikiLeaks dump in April 2011, indicated that US officials considered him a relatively high risk.

The Australian government said it wanted to prevent Habib from being paid by the media for interviews or "making profits from committing a crime," but he had not been charged or convicted of a crime in any country. (Current anti-terrorism laws in Australia make it illegal to be involved in terrorist organisations, but Habib was already in custody when these laws were introduced and he cannot be convicted under them. There is no evidence that he was involved in such organisations.) John Howard, then Australian Prime Minister, ruled out any apology to Habib.

Habib told his family everything that had happened after he left Sydney in July 2001. Just in case something bad happens to him, he said, "I want them to know fully everything".

Habib has struggled to get back to his normal life. On 22 August 2005 he complained of having been attacked by three men with a knife while walking with his wife near his home in Guildford. He told police that he was followed by a car that cut its headlights as he and his wife, Maha, went for a walk just after midnight, and that as the men ran away, the person holding the knife had yelled "something like 'this should keep you quiet"'.

On 29 March 2006, Habib and his son Moustafa said that they witnessed the aftermath of a double murder in the Sydney suburb of Granville. When they reported the murder to police, Habib alleges they were abused, assaulted and interrogated by police officers. On 3 April, he announced his intention to sue New South Wales Police for false imprisonment and assault.

On 11 June 2007, the Australian Broadcasting Commission's (ABC) investigative journalism program, Four Corners, aired a documentary on extraordinary renditions and the ghost prisoners who were being held by US civilian intelligence agencies abroad. Because of Habib's arrest in Pakistan and rendition to Egypt, the program featured his case.

On 7 March 2008, Habib lost his defamation case against Nationwide News, publisher of The Daily Telegraph. Justice Peter McClellan found Habib was "prone to exaggerate", "evasive" and had made claims about mistreatment in Pakistan and Egypt which could not be sustained. He found that "Habib's claims that he was seriously mistreated in the place of detention in Islamabad cannot be accepted" and "that this evidence was given in order to enhance his forensic position in the present litigation." In November 2008, Habib published his memoir, My Story: The Tale of a Terrorist Who Wasn't, written with Julia Collingwood. In it he recounted events of torture at the places he was detained.

On 1 May 2009, Habib lost an appeal in the Full Federal Court against a 2007 Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) decision that affirmed the former Foreign Affairs minister's decision in 2006 to refuse him an Australian passport. The government had revoked his passport when he was first returned to Australia and refused to issue him one in 2006. The AAT had concluded that Habib and his wife had given false evidence in the proceedings. They said that Habib still held the extremist sentiments that the government had understood he had held before 2001.

In February 2010, Habib was scheduled to appear in his ten-minute play, Waiting For Mamdouh, a monologue about his time in detention, at the Short+Sweet theatrical festival in Sydney.

In December 2010, Habib reached an out-of-court, confidential settlement with the Australian government. He received a secret sum in exchange for absolving the government of liability in his treatment during his detention by the United States. At the time, Habib has said that he plans to use the money to begin an international lawsuit against the Egyptian and United States governments over his treatment. He said that he had fresh evidence, including film footage.

On 13 February 2011, the Sydney Morning Herald published an article confirming Habib's accounts of torture in Egypt with at least one Australian officer as a witness, as an Egyptian officer had affirmed his account and named the officer. The Australian government initiated an investigation. The newspaper said the officer's account was the reason that the government had settled with Habib in December 2010. The officer said there were videotapes of the interrogations of Habib.

In April 2011, Habib's case file was among many documents from the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in the WikiLeaks. His records from Guantanamo Bay included American comments that he was "deceptive." In May 2011, Habib was granted an Australian passport. The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) said that it no longer considered him a security risk.

Entrance into Australian politics
In the March 2007 New South Wales state election, Habib stood as an independent candidate in the safe Labor seat of Auburn in Sydney. He received less than 5% of the vote and the seat was comfortably retained by the Australian Labor Party.

He campaigned for the removal of the Federal Government's anti-terror laws, stating "The terror laws are if you have terrorists, but we don't have terrorists".

title: Mamdouh Habib


text:
Cab signalling

Cab signaling is a railway safety system that communicates track status and condition information to the cab, crew compartment or driver's compartment of a locomotive, railcar or multiple unit. The information is continually updated giving an easy to read display to the train driver or engine driver.

The simplest systems display the trackside signal, while more sophisticated systems also display allowable speed, location of nearby trains, and dynamic information about the track ahead. Cab signals can also be part of a more comprehensive train protection system that can automatically apply the brakes stopping the train if the operator does not respond appropriately to a dangerous condition.

The main purpose of a signal system is to enforce a safe separation between trains and to stop or slow trains in advance of a restrictive situation. The cab signal system is an improvement over the wayside signal system, where visual signals beside or above the right-of-way govern the movement of trains, as it provides the train operator with a continuous reminder of the last wayside signal or a continuous indication of the state of the track ahead.

History
The first such systems were installed on an experimental basis in the 1910s in the United Kingdom, in the 1920s in the United States, and in the Netherlands in the 1940s. Modern high-speed rail systems such as those in Japan, France, and Germany were all designed from the start to use in-cab signalling due to the impracticality of sighting wayside signals at the new higher train speeds. Worldwide, legacy rail lines continue to see limited adoption of Cab Signaling outside of high density or suburban rail districts and in many cases is precluded by use of older intermittent Automatic Train Stop technology.

In North America, the coded track circuit system developed by the Pennsylvania Railroad (PRR) and Union Switch & Signal (US&S) became the de facto national standard. Variations of this system are also in use on many rapid transit systems and form the basis for several international cab signalling systems such as CAWS in Ireland, BACC in Italy, ALSN in Russia and the first generation Shinkansen signalling developed by Japan National Railways (JNR).

In Europe and elsewhere in the world, cab signalling standards were developed on a country by country basis with limited interoperability, however new technologies like the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) aim to improve interoperability. The train-control component of ERTMS, termed European Train Control System (ETCS), is a functional specification that incorporates some of the former national standards and allows them to be fully interoperable with a few modifications.

Cab signal types
All cab signalling systems must have a continuous in-cab indication to inform the driver of track condition ahead; however, these fall into two main categories. Intermittent cab signals are updated at discrete points along the rail line and between these points the display will reflect information from the last update. Continuous cab signals receive a continuous flow of information about the state of the track ahead and can have the cab indication change at any time to reflect any updates. The majority of cab signalling systems, including those that use coded track circuits, are continuous.

Intermittent
The German Indusi and Dutch ATB-NG fall into this category. These and other such systems provide constant reminders to drivers of track conditions ahead, but are only updated at discrete points. This can lead to situations where the information displayed to the driver has become out of date. Intermittent cab signalling systems have functional overlap with many other train protection systems such as trip stops, but the distinction is that a driver or automatic operating system makes continuous reference to the last received update.

Continuous
Continuous systems have the added benefit of fail safe behaviour in the event a train stops receiving the continuous event relied upon by the cab signalling system. Early systems use the rails or loop conductors laid along the track to provide continuous communication between wayside signal systems and the train. These systems provided for the transmission of more information than was typically possible with contemporary intermittent systems and are what enabled the ability to display a miniature signal to the driver; hence the term, "cab signalling". Continuous systems are also more easily paired with Automatic Train Control technology, which can enforce speed restrictions based on information received through the signalling system, because continuous cab signals can change at any time to be more or less restrictive, providing for more efficient operation than intermittent ATC systems.

Information transmission
Cab signals require a means of transmitting information from wayside to train. There are a few main methods to accomplish this information transfer.

Electric or magnetic
This is popular for early intermittent systems that used the presence of a magnetic field or electric current to designate a hazardous condition. The British Rail Automatic Warning System (AWS) is an example of a two-indication cab signal system transmitting information using a magnetic field.

Inductive
Inductive systems are non-contact systems that rely on more than the simple presence or absence of a magnetic field to transmit a message. Inductive systems typically require a beacon or an induction loop to be installed at every signal and other intermediate locations. The inductive coil uses a changing magnetic field to transmit messages to the train. Typically, the frequency of pulses in the inductive coil are assigned different meanings. Continuous inductive systems can be made by using the running rails as one long tuned inductive loop.

Examples of intermittent inductive systems include the German Indusi system. Continuous inductive systems include the two-aspect General Railway Signal Company "Automatic Train Control" installed on the Chicago and North Western Railroad among others.

Coded track circuits
A coded track circuit based system is essentially an inductive system that uses the running rails as information transmitter. The coded track circuits serve a dual purpose: to perform the train detection and rail continuity detection functions of a standard track circuit, and to continuously transmit signal indications to the train. The coded track circuit systems eliminate the need for specialized beacons.

Examples of coded track circuit systems include the Pennsylvania Railroad standard system, a variation of which was used on the London Underground Victoria line, Later, audio frequency (AF) track circuit systems eventually came to replace "power" frequency systems in rapid transit applications as higher frequency signals could self-attenuate reducing the need for insulated rail joints. Some of the first users of AF cab signal systems include the Washington Metro and Bay Area Rapid Transit. More recently, digital systems have become preferred, transmitting speed information to trains using datagrams instead of simple codes. The French TVM makes use of the running rails to transmit the digital signalling information, while the German LZB system makes use of auxiliary wires strung down the centre of the track to continually transmit the signalling information.

Transponder
Transponder based systems make use of fixed antenna loops or beacons (called balises) that transmit datagrams or other information to a train as it passes overhead. While similar to intermittent inductive systems, transponder based cab signalling transmit more information and can also receive information from the train to aid traffic management. The low cost of loops and beacons allows for a larger number of information points that may have been possible with older systems as well as finer grained signalling information. The British Automatic Train Protection was one example of this technology along with the more recent Dutch ATB-NG.

Wireless
Wireless cab signalling systems dispense with all track-based communications infrastructure and instead rely on fixed wireless transmitters to send trains signalling information. This method is most closely associated with communications-based train control. ETCS levels 2 and 3 make use of this system, as do a number of other cab signalling systems under development.

Cab display unit
The cab display unit (CDU), (also called a driver machine interface (DMI) in the ERTMS standard) is the interface between the train operator and the cab signalling system. Early CDU's displayed simple warning indications or representations of wayside railway signals. Later, many railways and rapid transit systems would dispense with miniature in-cab signals in favour of an indication of what speed the operator was permitted to travel at. Typically this was in conjunction with some sort of Automatic Train Control speed enforcement system where it becomes more important for operators to run their trains at specific speeds instead of using their judgement based on signal indications. One common innovation was to integrate the speedometer and cab signal display, superimposing or juxtaposing the allowed speed with the current speed. Digital cab signalling systems that make use of datagrams with "distance to target" information can use simple displays that simply inform the driver when they are approaching a speed penalty or have triggered a speed penalty or more complex ones that show a moving graph of the minimum braking curves permitted to reach the speed target.

CDU's also inform the operator which, if any, mode the system might be in or if it is active at all. CDU's can also be integrated into the alertness system, providing count-downs to the alertness penalty or a means by which to cancel the alarm.

Cab signalling systems in the United States
Cab signalling in the United States was driven by a 1922 ruling by the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) that required 49 railways to install some form of automatic train control in one full passenger division by 1925. While several large railways, including the Santa Fe and New York Central, fulfilled the requirement by installing intermittent inductive train stop devices, the PRR saw an opportunity to improve operational efficiency and installed the first continuous cab signal systems, eventually settling on pulse code cab signaling technology supplied by Union Switch and Signal.

In response to the PRR lead, the ICC mandated that some of the nation's other large railways must equip at least one division with continuous cab signal technology as a test to compare technologies and operating practices. The affected railroads were less than enthusiastic, and many chose to equip one of their more isolated or less trafficked routes to minimize the number of locomotives to be equipped with the apparatus.

Several railways chose the inductive loop system rejected by the PRR. These railways included the Central Railroad of New Jersey (installed on its Southern Division), the Reading Railroad (installed on its Atlantic City Railroad main line), the New York Central, and the Florida East Coast. Both the Chicago and North Western and Illinois Central employed a two-aspect system on select suburban lines near Chicago. The cab signals would display "Clear" or "Restricting" aspects. The CNW went further and eliminated the wayside intermediate signals in the stretch of track between Elmhurst and West Chicago, requiring trains to proceed solely based on the 2-aspect cab signals. The Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad had a 3-aspect system operating by 1935 between Portage, Wisconsin and Minneapolis, Minnesota.

As the Pennsylvania Railroad system was the only one adopted on a large scale, it became a de facto national standard, and most installations of cab signals in the current era have been this type. Recently, there have been several new types of cab signalling which use communications-based technology to reduce the cost of wayside equipment or supplement existing signal technologies to enforce speed restrictions and absolute stops and to respond to grade crossing malfunctions or incursions.

The first of these was the Speed Enforcement System (SES) employed by New Jersey Transit on their low-density Pascack Valley Line as a pilot program using a dedicated fleet of 13 GP40PH-2 locomotives. SES used a system of transponder beacons attached to wayside block signals to enforce signal speed. SES was disliked by engine crews due to its habit of causing immediate penalty brake applications without first sounding an overspeed alarm and giving the engineer a chance to decelerate. SES is in the process of being removed from this line, and is being replaced with CSS.

Amtrak uses the Advanced Civil Speed Enforcement System (ACSES) for its Acela Express high-speed rail service on the NEC. ACSES was an overlay to the existing PRR-type CSS and uses the same SES transponder technology to enforce both permanent and temporary speed restrictions at curves and other geographic features. The on-board cab signal unit processes both the pulse code "signal speed" and the ACSES "civil speed", then enforces the lower of the two. ACSES also provides for a positive stop at absolute signals which could be released by a code provided by the dispatcher transmitted from the stopped locomotive via a data radio. Later this was amended to a simpler "stop release" button on the cab signal display.

title: Cab signalling


text:
User talk:Abdel Qadir

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 02:50, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Hello. As you've probably realized by now, we have a rule prohibiting any individual from reverting the same page more than three times in 24 hours. You have been blocked for violating this rule on Binational solution; when your block expires I encourage you to return and continue contributing. —No-One Jones (m) 06:02, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

State terrorism
What a shame you didn't like my revert. What I find a shame that you employ a slur ("Jew") to someone you have never dealt with. No personal attacks, please. I never attacked you. JFW | T@lk  01:27, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

1. You should read NPOV. WhisperToMe 02:13, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC) 2. From looking at the post above, I am going to say this: Let's have racial and cultural harmony, shall we? The EN wikipedia reaches the whole world, and you will deal with all sorts 'a people here, such as Mexicans, Chinese, Swedes, Canadians, and yes, Jews. WhisperToMe 02:13, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Contact with Zaain
Assallam-o-Allaikum

Contact with me (preferably by email).

Take care Allah hafiz

NPOV and your intro
"I name myself Abdel Qādir al-Jazā'irī after the great leader of Algerian resistance to French colonialism because in these so-called modern times, the Arab and Islam still is fighting against the colonialism of Jews and Americans. And it will continue so until the justice is finally found." We're trying to write an encyclopedia here, not enable missions to push a point of view. Please do reread NPOV - we take it seriously. A gratuitously confrontative statement on a user page is likely to lead to bad working conditions.

Please do continue to edit, though. Another useful article to read is Cite sources - when one edits contentious articles, it can help in arguments to justify every assertion. References are a good thing! - David Gerard 15:04, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Sock puppets and Wikipedia
These all appear to be you: Pravda, RomperRoomReject, Goines, Kosudo CONMEBOL, 888, Abdel Qadir, SLUR, Crypto, Weisenthaler. We are very tolerant and try to assume good faith, but we aren't stupid and can read the logs. Please do not do this sort of thing again - David Gerard 01:23, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * That must be the royal "we". The "we" that I'm one of doesn't have a problem with sockpuppets so long as they're not used for nefarious purposes.Dr Zen 07:23, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * In this case, they were: this user and all those users (and several others) are socks of User:Alberuni, who's in arbitration at present for personal abusiveness, 3RR violations and POV-pushing, and created a whole pile of socks around that time, apparently to continue the task - David Gerard 13:42, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Istiqlal.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Istiqlal.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. 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 qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then 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 media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. 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 any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. *drew 16:15, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abdel Qadir


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geno (Religion)

Geno (Religion) was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete

Geno (Religion)
It may very well be real, no evidence of notability is given. Tuf-Kat 02:52, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Looks like a load of grey crap to me. DCEdwards1966 04:19, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Just a text dump from . Not encyclopedic; I don't think it has possibilities for being so. Delete. --jpgordon{gab} 06:50, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * The Geno cult is a theme in forum/other invasions by the SA Goons. Adherents dress in gray, stand around saying "The Path is gray", and get in the way. Obviously, the made-up writings of Geno are fairly useless. Delete. --Twinxor 07:46, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons above. --[[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 20:45, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Weird mesh of new age religion and science fiction. Eric119 22:06, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, just because it's so damn interesting. -- Crevaner 10:27, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Start over. The article as it stands is useless, but I would like to see some article on Geno in the wikipedia. - Lifefeed 15:20, Dec 2, 2004 (UTC)
 * delete the article is black and white, it is not gray, it is not Geno. I got more info out of the vfd process than out of the article. If someone could write an actual NPOV article on Geno, I'd be open to it, but this article doesn't seem to have what I want to see in an article on an obscure quasi-religion. Pedant 01:34, 2004 Dec 5 (UTC)
 * Delete. Discredits the colour grey. Wyss 12:17, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a gyp of the story “The Way”. --Blade Hirato 12:23, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Yanzhao Evening News

Yanzhao Evening News or Yanzhao Wanbao, also known as Yanzhao Evening Post, is a tabloid newspaper published in Shijiazhuang, capital of Hebei Province, China. Its predecessor was Shijiazhuang Evening Post (石家庄晚报), which was launched on January 1, 1988, and ceased publication at the end of 1989.

Yanzhao Evening Post, sponsored by the Shijiazhuang Daily Agency (石家庄日报社), is the earliest evening newspaper in Hebei. Focused on the daily life of Shijiazhuang citizens, the newspaper is very popular for its sports and entertainment report. It is mainly circulated in city areas and 17 counties belonging to Shijiazhuang. These days, the paper can be bought in 11 cities of Hebei, but the quantity is still small.

The main competitor of Yanzhao Evening Post is Yanzhao Metropolis Daily, a tabloid published all 11 cities of Hebei.

title: Yanzhao Evening News


text:
Granges

Granges may refer to:
 * Monastic granges, farming estates belonging to a monastery

 * The National Grange of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry (The Grange), an agricultural organization
 * Granges, Saône-et-Loire, a commune in France
 * Granges, Switzerland, a municipality of the canton of Fribourg
 * Granges-près-Marnand, a municipality of the canton of Fribourg, Switzerland
 * Granges-Paccot, a municipality of the canton of Fribourg, Switzerland
 * Grenchen (in German, "Granges" in French), a municipality of the canton of Solothurn, Switzerland
 * Gränges AB, previously Trafik AB Grängesberg-Oxelösund, a Swedish industrial and mining company

title: Granges


text:
Talk:Army of Northern Virginia

Flag is wrong
The flag you have as The "Army of north Virginia", is incorrect. That is his headquarters flag. It was made by his wife and daughters. This flag served as Lee's headquarters flag until 1863. The original is on display in the Museum of the Confederacy. The stars are arranged to depict the Ark of the Covenant. hope I did this right.

Did You Know?

Confederate General P.G.T. Beauregard was instrumental in creating the battle flag that has come to be synonymous with the Confederacy. Following the First Battle of Bull Run in 1861, he approved a new flag design for the Army of Northern Virginia after recognizing that the original Confederate flag—known as the “Stars and Bars”—looked too similar to the U.S. flag when seen in the confusion of battle

Retrived from:

68.97.206.238 (talk) 20:33, 27 June 2015 (UTC)JD Glenn III

Untitled
You've been referenced by the media! See "According to wikipedia.com (sic), the Army of Northern Virginia, led by Gen. Robert E. Lee, was the primary military force of the Confederacy in the eastern theater of the Civil War." - Ta bu shi da yu 02:55, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Lee naming it
Beauregard and Johnston commanded the army itself beforehand, but Army of Northern Virginia, as a name, was created by Lee just after he was appointed to command. --Chr.K. 21:57, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I have souped up the description a bit. I have a high degree of confidence in the Eicher citation; their Civil War High Commands reference contains an exhaustive history of unit lineage. I think what we have here is renaming retrospectively. It is probable that Eicher has documentation showing the name was assigned effective March 14 simply because some of those records were created after Lee assumed command. This is very similar in nature to other armies that had later more famous names. A prime example is the Army of the Tennessee, which is almost universally cited as fighting in the Battle of Shiloh, although that name was not formally designated until October 16, 1862. Hal Jespersen 00:21, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

 * This is incorrect. The Official Records have a telegram from Joe Johnston in February of 1862 referring to himself as "commanding the Army of Northern Virginia."  http://digital.library.cornell.edu/cgi/t/text/pageviewer-idx?c=moawar;cc=moawar;q1=Army%20of%20Northern%20Virginia;rgn=full%20text;idno=waro0005;didno=waro0005;view=image;seq=1097 It's unclear when that name came into use, but it was most certainly prior to Lee assuming command. The Frog (talk) 05:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

edits of May 5, 2009
I don't attempt to maintain this article and don't feel like going through an extensive editing process to address the edits of today, but don't you think: Hal Jespersen (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The detailed order of battle data belongs more appropriately in the individual battle or campaign articles? (I hate to think that someone might try this for Army of the Potomac.) If a reader wanted to know who commanded an artillery unit at Gettysburg, would he really go here to find out? Why not just link to the many OOB articles that are already written and maintained by people familiar with those battles?
 * Footnotes should be in English for this version of the article?

 * I don't agree to your point about where the data about the units belongs; The people looking for data about the army will especially look for the basic history and structure of the army. This belongs clearly here. Shifting through all individual battles is counter productive to find that out. This provides a good basic overview with clear and simple tables. I agree that someone who wants to find out more about the individual campaigns will go and look there then, but this point got nothing to do with the history of the army itself. Linking to the OOB articles is a good additional idea, I'll see to that when I find the time.
 * Footnotes should be in english, of course. Thanks for pointing that out. Fixed.
 * Fixed some spelling.

Shibirian —Preceding undated comment added 16:45, 16 June 2009 (UTC).

Well, one more data point. If you consult any of the books published about the Army of Northern Virginia, I do not believe you will find any that provide comparable tables, even though those books are obviously much longer and more detailed. Such tables are typically found only in books about the battles. And since Wikipedia has a rich collection of methods to create links pointing to other articles, the details could easily be handled using, say, Further templates pointing to the more complete order of battle listings. Hal Jespersen (talk) 15:27, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Puffery
I found and removed only one word of what  might  have been puffery so i removed the box that said it had some.Lee Tru. (talk) 23:59, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Merging the article about the Confederate Army of the Potomac
I think that we should merge the article about the Confederate Army of the Potomac into this article, they're the same army, the only difference is the name. --23.31.136.201 (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * In a word, No. The Army of the Potomac was formed for a specific purpose and then was renamed as the scope of the civil war changed. It was not created to be the Army of Northern Virginia when it was formed. You are conflating two issues which shows a poor grasp of history. In recent history that is like combining the Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) with the United States Army Vietnam (USARV). I have removed the templates because it would be daft to continue.5.81.1.114 (talk) 11:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Army of Northern Virginia


text:
User talk:Desktiger

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Flockmeal 02:56, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

DRAMeXchange
DRAMeXchange has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this company might not yet be notable enough for an article. Please review Notability (companies and corporations) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the prod notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 20:51, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Lijiang
Until you can develop the new article properly, please leave them be. The article you had created was copied and pasted with no proper wiki formatting, thus it was also messy. Oore (talk) 05:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of QQLive
A tag has been placed on QQLive requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. ukexpat (talk) 15:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of ISuppli
I have nominated ISuppli, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/ISuppli. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Scheinwerfermann (talk) 16:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of QQLive

The article QQLive has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Appears to be a non-notable company. Article is unsourced and appears to be a advertisement.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Alpha Quadrant   talk    00:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

The Asia Wall Street Journal listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Asia Wall Street Journal. Since you had some involvement with the The Asia Wall Street Journal redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Desktiger