text:
List of people from Bucharest

This is a list of native Bucharesters.

A

 * Otto Ackermann (1909–1960), conductor
 * Anda Adam (born 1980), singer and model
 * Gheorghe Adamescu (1869–1942), literary historian and bibliographer
 * Olivia Addams (born 1996), singer
 * Adena, singer
 * Viorica Agarici (1886–1979), nurse and philanthropist, Righteous Among the Nations
 * Adolf Albin (1848–1920), chess player
 * Mircea Albulescu (1934–2016), actor
 * Radu Aldulescu (born 1954), novelist
 * Dan Andrei Aldea (1950–2020), singer
 * Liana Alexandra (1947–2011), composer, pianist, and music educator
 * Andrei Alexandrescu (born 1969), Romanian-American C++ and D language programmer and author
 * George Alexandru (1957–2016), actor
 * Nicoleta Alexandru (born 1968), singer
 * Florin-Alexandru Alexe (born 1979), economist and politician
 * Marius Alexe (born 1990), footballer
 * Paul Alexiu (1893–1963), general
 * Barbu Alinescu (1890–1952), general
 * Mosko Alkalai (1931–2008), Israeli actor
 * Radu Almășan (born 1980), singer
 * Melek Amet (1960–2008), model
 * Doru Ana (1954–2022), actor
 * David Andelman (born 1955), Israeli theoretical physicist
 * Aurelian Andreescu (1942—1986), singer
 * Eva Andrei, American physicist
 * Ion Andreescu (1850–1882), painter
 * Mihail Andricu (1894–1974), singer
 * Ion Valentin Anestin (1900–1963), graphic artist, engraver, painter, sculptor, journalist, and dramatist
 * Luminița Anghel (born 1968), dance/pop recording artist, songwriter, and politician
 * Babis Angourakis (1951–2014), Greek politician
 * Edward Aninaru (born 1976), photographer
 * Constantin Anton (1894–1993), general
 * Kristaq Antoniu (1907–1979), singer
 * Mitzura Arghezi (1924–2015), actress and politician
 * Dan Apostol (1957–2013), writer
 * Carol Ardeleanu (1883–1949), writer
 * Tudor Arghezi (1880–1967), writer
 * Costache Aristia (1800–1880), poet, actor, and translator
 * Ștefan Arteni (1947–2020), artist, painter, calligrapher, architect, philosopher, historian, essayist, and translator
 * Constantin C. Arion (1855–1923), politician
 * Bazil Assan (1860–1918), engineer, explorer, and economist
 * Alina Astafei (born 1969), track and field athlete
 * Alexandru Athanasiu (born 1955), politician and jurist
 * Genica Athanasiou (1897–1966), Romanian-French actress
 * Vera Atkins (1908–2000), British intelligence officer
 * Bogdan Aurescu (b. 1973), lawyer, diplomat and politician
 * Colette Avital (born 1940), Israeli diplomat and politician
 * Ana-Maria Avram (born 1961), composer
 * Chris Avram (1931–1989), actor

B

 * Emanoil Bacaloglu (1830–1891), mathematician, physicist, and chemist
 * Laura Badea-Cârlescu (b. 1970), fencer, Olympic, World and European champion in foil, International Fencing Hall of Famer
 * Constantin Banu (1873–1940), writer, journalist, and politician
 * Elisheva Barak-Ussoskin (born 1936), Israeli judge
 * Eugen Barbu (1924–1993), novelist, short story writer, and journalist
 * Linda Maria Baros (born 1981), poet, translator, and literary critic
 * Cezar Bădiță (born 1979), swimmer
 * Alexander Bălănescu (born 1954), violinist
 * Nicolae Bălcescu (1819–1852), soldier, historian, and journalist
 * Radu Bălescu (1932–2006), Romanian and Belgian scientist
 * Irina-Camelia Begu (born 1990), tennis player
 * Alexandra Bellow (born 1935), mathematician
 * Joana Benedek (born 1972), Romanian-Mexican actress
 * Marthe Bibesco (1886–1973), Romanian-French writer, socialite, and political hostess
 * Andreea Bibiri (born 1975), actress
 * Ingrid Bisu (born 1987), actress
 * Claudiu Bleonț (born 1959), actor
 * Lucian Boia (born 1944), historian
 * Cezar Bolliac (1813–1881), archaeologist, journalist, and poet
 * Dan Bordeianu (born 1975), actor
 * Mircea Bornescu (born 1980), footballer
 * Constantin Bosianu (1815–1882), jurist and politician
 * Ana Maria Brânză (born 1984), épée fencer
 * Vintilă Brătianu (1867–1930), construction engineer, mayor of Bucharest and Prime Minister of Romania
 * Emilian Bratu (1904–1991), chemical engineer
 * Florin Bratu (born 1980), footballer
 * Roxana Briban (1971–2010), operatic soprano
 * Silviu Brucan (1916–2006), communist politician
 * Dionis Bubani (1926–2006), Albanian writer, playwright, humorist, and translator
 * Dragoș Bucur (born 1977), actor
 * Gheorghe Bucur (born 1980), football player
 * Doina Bumbea (1950–1997), artist and abductee in North Korea

C

 * Alexandra Cadanțu (born 1990), tennis player
 * Nicolae Cajal (1919–2004), Jewish physician, academic, politician and philanthropist
 * Rukmini Maria Callimachi (born 1973), Romanian-American journalist and poet
 * Christian Calson (born 1975), Romanian-American independent filmmaker
 * Constantin Cantacuzino (1905–1958), aviator
 * Catherine Caradja (1893–1993), aristocrat and philanthropist
 * Costache Caragiale (1815–1877), actor and theatre manager
 * Mateiu Caragiale (1885–1936), poet and prose writer
 * Toma Caragiu (1925–1977), theatre, television and film actor
 * Ion Caramitru (1942–2021), stage and film actor
 * Nae Caranfil (born 1960), film director and screenwriter
 * Barbu Catargiu (1807–1862), politician and journalist
 * Paul Cazan (born 1951), football player
 * Vera Călin (1921–2013), Romanian-American literary critic, essayist and translator
 * George Călinescu (1899–1965), literary critic, historian, novelist and journalist
 * Ion I. Câmpineanu (1841–1888), politician, mayor of Bucharest and the first head of the National Bank of Romania
 * Gabriel Cânu (born 1981), footballer
 * Mircea Cărtărescu (born 1956), poet, novelist and essayist
 * Nicu Ceaușescu (1951–1996), the youngest child of Romanian leader Nicolae and Elena Ceaușescu
 * Remus Cernea (born 1974), activist
 * Nicole Cherry (born 1998), singer
 * Hristu Chiacu (born 1986), footballer
 * Maia Ciobanu (born 1952), composer and music educator
 * Victor Ciocâltea (1932–1983), chess master
 * Liviu Ciulei (1923–2011), theater and film director, film writer, actor, architect, educator, costume, and set designer
 * Henri Coandă (1886–1972), inventor, aerodynamics pioneer, and builder of an experimental aircraft
 * Alina Cojocaru (born 1981), ballet dancer
 * Dragoș Coman (born 1980), swimmer
 * Sergiu Comissiona (1928–2005), Romanian-Israeli-American conductor and violinist
 * Corneliu Coposu (1914–1995), politician and communist detainee
 * Grigore C. Crăiniceanu (1852–1935), military officer, War Minister, and member of the Romanian Academy
 * Michael Cretu (born 1957), Romanian–German musician
 * Nicolae Crețulescu (1812–1900), medical doctor and politician, second Prime Minister of Romania following the assassination of Barbu Catargiu; one of the first presidents of the Romanian Academy
 * Sergiu Cunescu (1923–2005), social democratic politician

D

 * Horia Damian (1922–2012), painter and sculptor
 * Alexandru Darie (1959–2019), theater director
 * Cella Delavrancea (1887–1991), pianist, writer, and teacher of piano
 * Henrieta Delavrancea (1897–1987), architect
 * Lucia Demetrius (1910–1992), novelist, poet, playwright, and translator
 * Cristian Diaconescu (born 1959), jurist and politician
 * Gheorghe Dinică (1934–2009), actor
 * Neagu Djuvara (1916–2018), historian, essayist, philosopher, journalist, novelist, and diplomat
 * Dora d'Istria (1828–1888), Wallachian-born Romantic writer and feminist of Albanian descent
 * Ion G. Duca (1879–1933), prime minister of Romania (1933)
 * Florea Dumitrache (1948–2007), football player and twice winner of the Romanian Footballer of the Year award

E

 * Mircea Eliade (1907–1986), historian of religion, fiction writer, and philosopher
 * David Emmanuel (1854–1941), mathematician, member of the Romanian Academy

F

 * Ștefan Fălcoianu (1835–1905), army general who served as Chief of the Romanian General Staff and War Minister
 * Nicolae Filimon (1819–1865), novelist and short-story writer
 * Nicolae Filipescu (1862–1916), politician, mayor of Bucharest
 * Răzvan Fodor (born 1975), singer and actor

G

 * Grigore Gafencu (1892–1957), politician, diplomat and journalist
 * Moses Gaster (1856–1939), Romanian-born Jewish-British scholar and a Hebrew linguist
 * Cristian Gațu (b. 1945), former handball player, twice winner of the World Championship with Romania and twice winner of the European Champions Cup with Steaua București
 * Alex Geana (born 1979), Romanian-American photographer and writer
 * Mircea Geoană (born 1958), politician
 * Dudu Georgescu (b. 1950), football player and twice winner of the European Golden Shoe
 * Haralamb H. Georgescu (1908–1977), modernist architect
 * Spiridon Georgescu (1887–1974), sculptor
 * Florin Gheorghiu (born 1944), chess player
 * Dimitrie Ghica (1816–1897), army officer, police prefect, politician, mayor of Bucharest and Prime Minister of Romania
 * Ion Ghica (1816–1897), revolutionary, mathematician, diplomat and politician
 * Alexandru Ghika (1902–1964), mathematician
 * Dinu C. Giurescu (1927–2018), historian and politician, son of Constantin C. Giurescu
 * Alexandru G. Golescu (1819–1881), politician
 * Gheorghe Gruia (1940–2015), handball player and twice world champion, named Greatest Handball Player of All Time by the International Handball Federation (IHF)

H

 * Clara Haskil (1895–1960), classical pianist
 * Nicolae Herlea (1927–2014), opera singer, baritone
 * Dragomir Hurmuzescu (1865–1954), physicist and inventor
 * John Houseman (1902–1988), Romanian-born British-American actor and film producer

I

 * Andrei Iancu (born 1968), Romanian-American engineer and intellectual property attorney
 * Andrew Ilie (born 1976), tennis player
 * Cristina Ionda, actress
 * Cassius Ionescu-Tulcea (1923–2021), mathematician
 * Andrei Ioniță (born 1994), cellist
 * Anghel Iordănescu (born 1950), footballer and manager of the national football team
 * Edward Iordănescu (born 1978), football manager and former player
 * Diana Iovanovici Șoșoacă (born 1975), Romanian lawyer and politician
 * Iosif Iser (1881–1958), painter and graphic artist
 * Petre Ispirescu (1830–1887), folklorist and publicist
 * Nora Iuga (born 1931), poet, writer, and translator

J

 * Marcel Janco (1895–1984), Romanian and Israeli visual artist, architect and art theorist

K

 * Ioan Kalinderu (1840–1913), law professor, writer, silviculturist, confidant of King Carol I and head of the Romanian Academy
 * Karmen (born 1997), singer
 * Marin Karmitz (born 1938), French businessman
 * Sergiu Klainerman (born 1950), mathematician
 * Franz Kneisel (1865–1926), Romanian-American violinist
 * Alex Kozinski (born 1950), judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

L

 * Traian Lalescu (1882–1929), mathematician
 * Alexandra Maria Lara (born 1978), Romanian-born German actress
 * Dinu Lipatti (1917–1950), classical pianist and composer
 * Monica Lovinescu (1923–2008), essayist, short story writer, literary critic, translator and journalist
 * Gherasim Luca (1913–1994), Surrealist theorist and poet
 * Mircea Lucescu (b. 1945), former football player and coach

M

 * Alexandru Macedonski (1854–1920), poet, novelist, dramatist and literary critic
 * Aureliu Manea (1945–2014), theatre director, actor, and writer
 * Roxana Maracineanu (born 1975), Romanian-born French backstroke swimmer
 * Gheorghe Marinescu (1863–1938), neurologist
 * Draga Olteanu Matei (1933–2020), film and stage actress
 * Cezar Mateus (born 1961), Romanian-American luthier
 * Ion Gheorghe Maurer (1902–2000), communist politician and lawyer
 * Preda Mihăilescu (born 1955), mathematician
 * Ion Minulescu (1881–1944), avant-garde poet, novelist, short story writer, journalist and playwright
 * Octavian Morariu (b. 1961), President of Rugby Europe
 * Jacob L. Moreno (1889–1974), Austrian-American psychiatrist and psychosociologist, thinker and educator
 * Maia Morgenstern (born 1962), film and stage actress

N

 * Gellu Naum (1915–2001), surrealist writer
 * Adrian Năstase (born 1950), politician, Prime Minister of Romania from 2000 to 2004
 * Ilie Năstase (born 1946), tennis player
 * Cristina Neagu (b. 1988), handball player. She has a record four IHF World Player of the Year awards.
 * Eddy Novarro (c. 1925–2003), photographer, collector and cosmopolitan

O

 * Alexandru Odobescu (1834–1895), archaeologist, author and politician
 * Ion Oncescu (b. 1978), prolific arm wrestler, hall of famer

P

 * Sașa Pană (1902–1981), avant-garde poet, novelist, and short story writer
 * Theodor Paleologu (b. 1973), historian, diplomat and politician, son of Alexandru Paleologu
 * Cristina Pasaroiu (born 1987), soprano
 * Margareta Pâslaru (b. 1943), actress and singer
 * Marcel Pauker (1896–1938), communist militant
 * Nicolae Paulescu (1869–1931), physiologist and politician
 * Camil Petrescu (1894–1957), playwright, novelist, philosopher and poet
 * Dan Petrescu (1953–2021), Romanian businessman and billionaire, one of the richest persons in Romania at the time
 * Gică Petrescu (1915–2006), singer and composer
 * Andrei Pleșu (born 1948), philosopher, essayist, journalist, literary and art critic
 * Valentin Poénaru (born 1932), Romanian–French mathematician
 * Ana Maria Popescu (b. 1984), fencer, Olympic, World and European champion, former World No. 1 in épée
 * Elvira Popescu (1894–1993), Romanian-French stage and film actress and theatre director
 * Petru Popescu (born 1944), Romanian-American writer, director and movie producer
 * Ion Popescu-Gopo (1923–1989), graphic artist and animator
 * Emanoil Protopopescu-Pake (1845–1893), law professor, police prefect and politician, mayor of Bucharest
 * Cristi Puiu (born 1967), film director and screenwriter

R

 * Connect-R (born 1982), musician
 * Victor Rebengiuc (born 1933), film and stage actor
 * Lia Roberts (born 1949), politician
 * Edward G. Robinson (1893–1973), Romanian-American actor
 * Gideon Rodan (1934–2006), Romanian-American biochemist
 * Alexandru Rosetti (1895–1990), linguist, editor, and memoirist
 * C. A. Rosetti (1816–1885), writer, politician and leader of the Wallachian Revolution of 1848; the Romanian Academy was founded on his initiative.
 * Leon Rotman (born 1950), sprint canoer
 * Angelica Rozeanu (1921–2006), one of the most successful female table tennis players in the history of the sport

S

 * Răzvan Sabău (born 1977), tennis player
 * Nicolae Saramandu (born 1941), Romanian linguist and philologist
 * Paul Schwartz (born 1940), politician, Jewish Community president, mechanical engineer and inventor
 * Alec Secăreanu (born 1984), actor
 * Alina Șerban (born 1987), actress
 * Serge Spitzer (1951–2012), Romanian-American artist
 * Saviana Stănescu (born 1967), Romanian-American poet, playwright and journalist
 * Sorin Stati (1931–2008), linguist
 * Simion Stoilow (1873–1961), mathematician
 * Barbu Ștefănescu Delavrancea (1858–1918), writer and poet

T

 * Nicolae Șerban Tanașoca (1941–2017), historian and philologist
 * Maria Tănase (1913–1963), singer and actress
 * Toni Tecuceanu (1972–2010), comedy actor
 * Cicerone Theodorescu (1908–1974), poet
 * George Topîrceanu (1886–1937), poet, short story writer and humourist
 * Nicolas Trifon (1949–2023), academic, editor and linguist
 * Corneliu Vadim Tudor (1949-2015), politician, poet, writer, journalist, and a Member of the European Parliament
 * Șerban Țițeica (1908–1985), quantum physicist
 * Cristian Țopescu (1937–2018), sports commentator, journalist and politician

V

 * Elena Văcărescu (1864–1947), Romanian-French aristocrat writer
 * Vazken I of Bucharest (1908–1994), Catholicos of the Armenian Apostolic Church (1953–1994)
 * Ion Vianu (born 1934), writer and psychiatrist
 * Ion Vîlcu (born 1966), software engineer, academic, administrator and diplomat
 * Dan-Virgil Voiculescu (born 1949), mathematician
 * Ion Vitner (1914–1991), literary critic and historian
 * Cătălin Voicu (born 1965), politician
 * George Vraca (1896–1964), stage and film actor
 * Alexandru Vulpe (1931–2016), historian and archaeologist, member of the Romanian Academy

W

 * Eugen Weber (1925–2007), Romanian-born American historian
 * Richard Wurmbrand (1909–2001), minister

Z

 * George Mihail Zamfirescu (1898–1939), prose writer and playwright

title: List of people from Bucharest


text:
Talk:Impeachment of Bill Clinton/Archive 1

Spin off
This article is a spin-off of the main Clinton biography. At present, it is identical to the section there. I copied it here to give it room to grow into a full article in its own right. Wolfman 20:37, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Just a little biased
I thought this was an encyclopedia, not a political blog. Obstruction by the national media? Democrats haunted for years and associated with corruption? Do I even need to ask the political affiliation of the person who wrote that?

Tarnished by bias
The earlier parts of the article do a (mostly) good job of explaining the facts of the impeachment and trial. However, the author shows bias by:

1) stating that the Democrats "voted in lockstep" against impeachment (even though he/she then immediately notes that five Democrats voted for at least one of the provisions),

2) asserting that Democrats who voted against the impeachment or against conviction were voting "to ignore the evidence," and

3) as noted by the previous commentator, accusing Clinton's "supporters in the national media" of committing "obstruction" to inquiry into the list of issues given by the author.

The conclusion of the article is written in a manner that I find inappropriate for a reference source. The Democrats who voted against impeachment and conviction were making a "short term, purely political decision" which would "haunt them" for "decades" in the eyes of the public, which "forever associated the Democratic Party with scandal and abuse of power"? Also the author attributes motives to the Democrats who opposed impeachment and conviction by saying they were "refusing to punish his scandals for fear of losing even more power to the Republicans." I think these statements should be removed; and they are so egregious that they cast doubt on the rest of the article, which should probably be reviewed by other people familiar with the case.

Context of The Clinton Scandals is needed to understand the impeachment
The impeachment trial was the tip of the “bimbo eruptions” scandals.

The “bimbo eruptions” was the tip of the entire Clinton Scandals.

A good defense attorney would, by necessity, try to compartmentalize the various scandals to stymie the prosecution by keeping the trial focused narrowly only on one, narrowly defined crime. (Remember how we were always reminded of Clinton’s skill at “compartmentalizing” his life, the “private” from the “public”? That was legalistic jargon for his ability to minimize, deny, rationalize and obstruct his behavior against the overwhelming evidence against him.)

However, an objective rendering of history need not accept his defense strategy of pretending that the entire universe of scandals – and therefore his impeachment – was merely about a single, stained, blue dress. The context of the entire list of scandals is needed to understand the full scope of the scandals, to understand why he was impeached (even the Juanita Broadderick testimony was available for review by then), and to understand one of the primary reasons the Republicans continue to gain politically, every political cycle since 1994. (By that election we already had witnessed Gary Aldrich’s book, “Unlimited Access,” the White House travel office and Filegate scandals, in addition to Hillary’s health care panel fiasco.)

Or, do you also subscribe to the theory that the Clinton Scandals were only about a stained, blue dress?

And five House Democrats voting each for a single article of impeachment does not refute that, as a body, the Democrats in Congress exhibited historical unanimity. Many did ignore the evidence. One example was the pressure put on Democratic members to avoid the Broadderick testimony for fear of retribution from the Democratic leadership. Further evidence was the pep rally they held on the White House lawn at the height of the impeachment proceeding. And the complete unanimity of the Senate Democrats.

If you want to learn about the impeachment itself, I suggest the House committee hearings and the House managers’ speeches on the floor of the Senate. They were inspiring.

Finally, to refer to my political leanings without acknowledging your own, does not negate them. If you present the impeachment in isolation, without the larger context, you simply continue Clinton’s own defense strategy of compartmentalization.

Objectivity restored
The bias evinced earlier has been edited out and the tag should be removed. As an aside, considering that Clinton is only the second president ever to have been impeached, this article is woefully short and should probably be considered a stub.

Paula Jones payment
In Paula Jones: The lawsuit was eventually dismissed without proceeding to trial, since Jones was unable to demonstrate any damages; the possibility of an appeal was disposed of by Clinton's paying Jones an out-of-court settlement of $850,000. He was also fined $91,000 for a contempt of court citation for evasive and misleading answers;

here, it's an "over $900,000 fine"... which is true? Jules.LT 16:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

"Politically weakend"?
A recent edit said that Clinton was "politically weakened" by the impeachment ordeal. While he was certainly distracted by the scandal for much of 1998, can he really be said to have been weakened by it? As I recall, going into his trial his approval numbers were hovering around 70 percent. Moreover, Republicans suffered significant losses in the 1998 midterm elections at the height of the impeachment scandal, which impelled Newt Gingrich, who had been Clinton's nemesis for most of his presidency, to resign. The scandal also somewhat paradoxically made a more sympathetic figure out of Hillary Clinton, which helped her start her own Senate career two years later.

I'm not saying Clinton was pleased about the scandal or the impeachment; I'm just saying that he wasn't exactly politically crippled by it all either, and that it actually helped him shore up support in his base. --Jfruh 22:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Anon is spreading misinformation
This anon User:68.209.2.94 is getting people bogged down in arguments about semantics and distracting attention from attempts to put actively incorrect information into articles on this topic. The Senate votes were 50-50 on the perjury charge and 55-45 to acquit on the obstruction charge, as this very article says later on in the body. See here, for instance, for the correct account. I've fixed this article and the Bill Clinton article. --Jfruh 05:01, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Archive
''Start new topics below I believe that the wording should be changed. I may be wrong, but I thought that the House of Reps. were responsible for the Impeachment section of a presidental trial; however, the Senate is reponsable for the Removal from Office portion. Therefore, Clinton was impeached, but he was not removed from office. Either I am comfused, or the information is misleading. Either way it is a bit confusing.

I would appreciate any feedback, because I do not want to edit the page as I am not absolutely sure. If someone out there does know I would like to either know that I am wrong or edit the page so that it reflects the correct information.

Thanks!

"Impeachment is to bring federal charges against someone in office. " "Impeachment is to bring federal charges against someone in office. "  Removed because Impeachment is the process of removing from office, "to bring charges" is vauge and implies a criminal act, which may not be necessary for impeachment

 * The House impeaches, much like a grand jury indictment. The Senate then conducts a trial on the charges.  Separate things.  There is no "impeachment section" of a trial.  Your statement is correct that he was impeached, but not removed from office.  Much as a defendant may be indicted but not convicted.  What paragraph in the article is misleading? Derex 02:05, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I think one important factor which is being overlooked is the fact that the court did not convict because the charges of perjury and obstruction did not fit the requirements of high crimes and misdemeanors. the constitutional requirements of impeachment should be mentioned because they go to the root of why he was not impeached. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.222.202.210 (talk) 01:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Defense
There were 13 managers who acted like the prosecution, was there any defense as such? Nil Einne 19:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Cost
is there any public document containing or estimating the cost of the trial? -ncm3@njit.edu 18:42, 18 Sept 2006 (EST)
 * I found this in the Wahington Post.

Independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr spent $6.2 million during the six months last year when he was deposing former White House intern Monica S. Lewinsky and concluding his impeachment case against President Clinton, according to the General Accounting Office. Total cost of the entire Whitewater / Paula Jones / Lewinsky investigations:

Starr commenced his investigation of Whitewater and related matters in August 1994. Since then, he has spent $39.2 million probing Whitewater and President Clinton's affair with Lewinsky. Before Starr's appointment, a special counsel appointed by Attorney General Janet Reno had spent $6 million on a probe of Whitewater.

I also have a citation for $7.2 million. But all things being equal I go with the Washington Post over the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette (no offense to any one that works for the ArDeGaz.

Proposed wording for the article: According to the Washington Post, the six month period of investigations and depositions that concluded with the impeachment proceedings cost the government at least $6.2 million dollars.

None of the articles I found tell me who got billed for that? The OIC has an "unlimited budget" so does that mean they have a budget at all or does it just come out of the DOJ? Mykll42 12:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Dates?
It would be nice to have some dates in here. When did the Starr investigation begin? When was its report released? This article is really thin on basic facts. \ Fnarf999 \ talk \ contribs \ 22:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

NPOV
OK guys, this article is pretty damn POV. I'm gonna quote a few excerpts here that are obvious, but the much more sinister bias is the one that comes from selectively stating facts. Number 1: Originally dealing with the failed land deal years earlier known as Whitewater, Starr, with the approval of Attorney General Janet Reno, expanded his investigation into Clinton's conduct during the sexual harassment lawsuit filed by a former Arkansas government employee, Paula Jones. The "failed land dealings" is not on relevent. It is clearly included to cast doubt on Starr. Number 2: The Republican leadership feared that they could not get enough votes to impeach Clinton in the incoming 106th Congress. So they hastily initiated impeachment proceedings during the post-election, lame duck session of the outgoing 105th Congress. "Hastily"? Jeez. Number 3: The presumptive Speaker-Elect, Bob Livingston, ironically resigned his job as an indirect result of Clinton's impeachment debate. Livingston chose to resign for his dishonor after his own marital infidelity came to light and encouraged Bill Clinton to show the same honor and resign for his infidelities and subsequent perjury. "Ironically"? This has very little factual relevence. "For his dishonor"? I don't it's wikipedia's job to judge honor. I mean, come on. Number 4: The key "lie" which Clinton was allegedly pressuring Currie (and Blumenthal) to make was that it was Lewinsky who initially pursued Clinton, not vice versa; unfortunately for the prosecution, Lewinsky herself stated that she was the one who instigated the relationship. "Lie" need not be in quotation marks. Seriously, this article is embarrasing for Wikipedia. Njerseyguy 06:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I fixed most of those and removed a lot of the editorializing. I left the fact that the investigation started with Whitewater as that is relevant.  People need to know why he was being investigated in the first place to know when / how he perjured himself. I also removed all references to the impeachment bills and trial failing to obtain bipartisan support.  I maintain that people can count on their own, especially as we have listed how each senator voted.  I feel more comfortable removing things with a pro-clinton POV as... well... as I have a pro-Clinton POV.  I welcome people checking on me for fairness.  I didn't touch the introduction.  I don't even know where to begin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mykll42 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

Bias in the first sentence
Even before you say he was Impeached for commiting a felony you preface it by saying "President Bill Clinton was acquitted". Bias bias bias.

Ymous 19:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I see no bias in reporting the resolution of the impeachment process in the first sentence. In fact, I'd find it quite odd if the article did not immediately state whether he was convicted or acquitted of the charges. Your phrasing makes me wonder if you understand the Constitutional process of impeachment. Derex 02:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't see an issue here either, but I woudn't object to mentioning that he was charged first and acquitted second. Croctotheface 02:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I see a major issue here. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and should not be written as such. The first sentence or two should define the subject of the article, not lead with the end result first. The first section should explain what the impeachment of Bill Clinton is, with the end result, naturally, at the end of the section. To emphasize the verdict first does violate WP:NPOV as, regardless of the result, it de-emphasizes the sequence of events within the process, and one can argue (I know: weasel words here) that by doing that, the introduction does push a point of view, intentionally or not. 147.70.242.40 19:00, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

 * Incorrect. The entire point of any trial is to convict. To leave out the result of a trial is rediculous. When someone is aquited of something, in the eyes of the law that person is innocent and can not be tried again. At that point the entire prosecution has been proven to only be a waste of tax payer money without any good done for the country.

 * I agree, I don't see how that can possibly qualify as bias. It doesn't use any words like "however" to belittle the point that he was impeached.  Rather, it serves as a thesis summary of the events described in the article; that he was impeached by the House, thereby resulting in a trial before the Senate, the result of which was acquittal.  I think it's pretty obvious that Ymous doesn't give a damn about neutrality; rather, people like him want to remind people that Clinton was impeached, and they don't want the fact that he was acquitted to hamper their argument.  Stylistically, the inclusion of both points in the same sentence could be reasonably debated either way, though it looks fine to me.  But bias?  No, not even close.

Since this has remained undisputed for the last 3 months, I am removing the POV tag. 71.197.156.89 11:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see anything bias in that. It does say that he was impeached by the House and acquitted by the Senate. I did think, however, that claiming this was disputed strictly down party lines is misleading. Five Republicans voted to acquit. That's not a small number considering the fact that the Senate is comprised of just 100 members.

A glaring piece of evidence that shows this was not a political move on the part of the Republicans is that all nine Supreme Court justices refused to attend his State of the Union address, including those who he had appointed. To them, the law, and more succinctly, the breaking of the law, was the issue to them.

 * Hahahaha your speculation about why the Justices didn't the State of the Union is comical. The announced reason was because they wanted to adhere to a tradition - since abandoned - that if one member of the Court cannot make the address, no member of the Court will attend. Let's not try to read our biases into the actions of otherwise uninvolved parties - especially members of the High Court.JasonCNJ 07:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

thats sentance isnt bias, its a fact. what would you change it to anyway? 69.115.204.217 (talk) 15:59, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Setting the bias question aside for a moment, the second sentence of the article is very confusingly worded, for a first-time reader of this article like myself: "He was subsequently acquitted of these charges by the Senate on February 12, 1999 for having an extra marital affair with former White House Intern Monica Lewinsky." That can't possibly mean what it seems to mean, grammatically. 66.41.120.32 (talk) 16:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

The POV tags return
The last section merits a POV tag (if not an earlier section or two) - a section on "political ramifications" should also include the effects on Congress in the 1998 elections, and in addition, there should be more discussion of the political environment affecting not only Clinton but Congress as well. In addition, the first section reads like a newspaper article written minutes after the announcement of the "verdict" - hardly NPOV. There should be more explanation of the impeachment process and background, preferably starting with the person who preceded Kenneth Starr as independent prosecutor (Robert Fiske) and the role of Senators Helms and Faircloth in the replacement of Fiske. The impeachment did not occur in a vacuum; the article should not imply it to be as such.147.70.242.40 18:48, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Voters who chose 'honesty' preferred Bush over Gore by over a margin of 5 to 1 implies that Clinton was the cause of Gore's defeat; in fact, Gore's ethics were also being questioned regarding his participation in fund-raising in the People's Republic of China. 147.70.242.40 19:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
 * The above links relating to Gore's ethics are from news program discussions in 1997 and are therefore not FACTS but OPINIONS. There are no reports or credible sources to trace the impact, if any, of the PRC investigation on the 2000 presidential election. Like it or not user 147.70.242.40, Clinton's impeachment in 1998 was more of a factor than an obscure investigation from 1997 that, again, is nowhere to be found on the campaign trail in 2000. RARoth 22:26, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I yanked the "Political Ramifications" section altogether. It talks about Bush, who wasn't even a candidate at the time of the impeachment. Too much conjecture & opinion, and it did nothing to illuminate "Impeachement of Bill Clinton." 216.14.73.97 22:49, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Newt
 * I put it back, as it was well-referenced. If there is consensus in here to remove it, then we can do that.  K u k i ni  hablame aqui 21:04, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I support the consensus to remove it and will do so shortly unless otherwise directed by consensus. The entire section is POV, references issues unrelated to President Clinton's actual impeachment - the subject of the article - and, while having many citations, is hardly "well-referenced." (I discount the hypothesis of Stanford and the student newspaper at Princeton...great schools though they are they do not yet rise to the level of notable source on an issue such as this.) Even the title of the section is problematic...it is not for wikipedia to determine the "political ramifications" of the impeachment and the random studies cited do not constitute reliable sources on how the American people interpreted the impeachment and its how that interpretation affected their political judgment in 2000. The entire section is conjecture and improper. JasonCNJ 04:24, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
 * except Al Gore himself blamed the Lewinsky scandal and subsequent impeachment for his defeat, even confronting Clinton on the matter. the references cite exit poll numbers and the analysis' of each of the studies cited are valid.  anyone who follows politics closely can remember that Bush jumped out to a huge early lead in the polls in the fall of 1999, with "character" being the number 1 issue on voters minds.  rather than removing the entire section, add to it and balance it out as you see fit, but i don't see a POV issue with it as it is. i also don't see a "consensus" to remove the section.Anthonymendoza 19:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

 * The consensus appears overwhelmingly in favor of removing the "political ramifications" section, as it is clearly one-sided and full of weasel language. Only conservative and neutral sources were cited, and the neutral ones (such as the AP article) don't seem to contain any specific information that supports the POV arguments made in this section.  The rest appears to be based on heresay that isn't covered anywhere in the citations.  Anthonymendoza commented on "exit poll numbers" that don't seem to be readily available in the citations.  Most data suggests in fact that name recognition played more of a factor for Bush than anything else.  He did use the impeachment scandal as a basis for campaigning on "character," as Anthonymendoza puts it, but there is simply no evidence cited here to support the assertion that voters gave decisive support as a direct result of this scandal.  Given the fact that nobody in the political science community can agree on what (if any) political ramifications resulted from this scandal, it is inappropriate to be citing a single point of view (POV) as fact in an encyclopedia.

Since there appears to be sufficient consensus on this, along with the fact that this argument has been disengaged for nearly a month, I am removing the POV tag along with the section on political ramifications. If someone would like to re-write it from a more neutral perspective, accurately citing sources, then that would be a good idea. However, I think there's enough agreement here now not to simply restore this weasel POV section without a drastic overhaul. 71.197.156.89 11:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * i disagree there is "sufficient consensus on this" to remove it. the person who added the tag has "disengaged for nearly a month."  the section is well referenced and legitimate.  others can add to it or rewrite it, but to just remove it based on a complaint from a handful of anonymous editors is foolish.  we could start a WP:RFC.  Anthonymendoza 13:26, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm sorry but why does anyone think THIS is legitimate:  "According to The Daily Princetonian, after the 2000 presidential election, "post-election polls found that, in the wake of Clinton-era scandals, the single most significant reason people voted for Bush was for his moral character"

Unless someone can explain otherwise, seems to me this is merely attempting to cast aspersion on the legitimacy of Bush's election, as if there was no reasion anyone voted for him other than he wasn't an adulterer. According to the Daily Princetonian? Forgive my own POV displayed in pointing this out, but the section is silly. Batvette (talk) 07:19, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

uytyfu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.136.110 (talk) 06:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate?
"Starr obtained further evidence of inappropriate behaviour by seizing the computer hard drive and email records of Monica Lewinsky."

Does the use of the word "inappropriate" here seem hopelessly parochial to anyone else? At the least it is a POV and/or passing judgement on a action which, in a country like France, is almost considered a positive sign in a leader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.247.73.130 (talk) 12:09, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

"Is"
I would like to see a more thorough analysis of the whole "what the meaning of the word 'is' is" statement. It's been thrown around for nearly a decade now, but I just realized that I don't have any clue about the original context. Googling doesn't seem to help - there are a lot of snickers and pop cultural references, but little in the way of analysis. Almost all of the time people quote just that line - hardly anyone gives the question which prompted it. Even then, it's hard to work through the layers, as the question refers to previous statements made by Clinton, and no one seems to ever quote these.

I think that Wikipedia would be much improved by a more complete discussion of the statement - the question and answers where the original 'is' was given, the question and context leading to Clinton's "what 'is' is" response, and linguistical analysis of the validity of the statement. Most of what I've seen has been just a knee-jerk "what a moron - everyone knows what 'is' means" dismissal. I would hope that we'd be able to find professional linguists views on the subject, when they treat the statement seriously. -- 18:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It's very clear from the context; you can read the transcript in dozens of places online. Clinton was attempting to "spin" his past testimony by suggesting his previous (untrue) denials of a relationship had referred only to that moment in time., i.e., the immediate period in which he was being questioned, not to any undefined past periods, when indeed an ongoing sexual relationship took place. Professional linguists can indeed opine as to whether there is ever any theoretical justification for various nuanced interpretations of conjugating the verb "to be;" but I don't see how that is of any value in this case, other than as trivia. There was clearly no misinterpretation on either side (Clinton or prosecutors) regarding the information being asked for or the answers provided. The infamous "is" quote was an improvised ex post facto attempt at wriggling out of a lie; a rather bold, lawyerly attempt, but nothing else, and ridiculous in any deposition or court of law.

A more concrete example might be to, say, accuse someone of embezzlement. The person answers unequivocally "No." Later, when uncontestable proof of the embezzlement is offered, the accused offers that her previous testimony only meant that "there IS no embezzlement going on" at that moment, the moment of questioning; although there "WAS" embezzlement going on a year before, PRIOR to the questioning. Hence, the accused claims her testimony is truthful. Again, linguists can discuss theoretical nuance all day; I think we all know that verbs can have narrow temporal sense or broader meanings, depending upon context. None of that changes in the slightest way the fact that the accused is simply grasping at straws to deflect her dishonest testimony. So I'd posit that the "knee-jerk, what a moron" responses are much more appropriate and relevant than philological analysis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.230.127.116 (talk) 05:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Unsourced OR
I removed this material because it is original research, not supported by any citations. To include this or anything like it we need to cite reliable sources who have done such analysis and drawn those conclusions. Tvoz | talk 06:23, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

''===Nationwide and Worldwide reaction===

''The American reaction to the scandal was mixed, but notably a majority of Americans polled, even those who disagreed with the President's politics and actions, nevertheless felt the scandal was overblown, politically motivated, and detracted from "real" news. Other Americans felt that the President was charged with serious crimes that warranted impeachment--e.g. obstruction of justice, perjury, and abuse of power (in the form of sexual harassment). However, as the impeachment dragged on, more and more Americans saw the process as a waste of time.

''In Europe, where the liberal Clinton was welcomed by the left-leading nations of the European Union, many treated the scandal as a joke and a show at how immature Americans were in regards to sex. However, many Europeans either refused to learn about or were just plainly uninformed that Clinton was not on trial for an extramarital affair--instead, as many supporters of impeachment pointed out, Clinton was on trial for his abuses of power and lying in court in regards to sex, not for the sex in itself. The European bemused and belittling reaction to the events helped to alienate many Americans from European ideas as Americans felt insulted by Europe's inability to understand the true, if trumped up, charges at hand.''

Unsourced or not, it's absolutely right. I was an American diplomat in Europe at this time. The European press did a terrible job of reporting on the situation, and most Europeans, even well-educated Europeans, believed Clinton was simply and solely "on trial" for having lied about an affair, or even for simply having an affair in the first place. The fact that it was a political strategem stemming from a financial impropriety/abuse of power investigation, and that the Lewinsky affair came up only through that investigation, was not understood. All the more odd since in most EU countries, "scandals" of various sorts are quite commonly used by political opponents to bring down politicians, which in the end is, of course, all Starr and his congressional supporters were opportunistically doing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.230.127.116 (talk) 05:41, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

On several occasions?
Under the section "The January 1998 press conference" it says "Clinton engaged in oral sex with Ms. Lewinsky on several occasions.[6][7]" I checked the sources of the two footnotes, and I don't see anything suggesting that it happened more than once. Perhaps the person who wrote this was confused by the reference in the source article to several private meetings at the White House, but those were Hillary Clinton's meetings, not Bill's.

91.87.163.24 (talk) 17:39, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

HE WAS NEVER IMPEACHED AND THE HOUSE OF REPS DOESNT IMPEACH... THE SENATE DOES.

As a fellow Democrat, I am sorry to dispell your claim. The House impeaches and the Senate convicts. He was impeached, but it was Gingrich and Kenneth Starr who truly lost the case. Starr's Independent Counsel position was demolished and Gingrich resigned from Congress altogether in humiliation204.169.161.1 (talk) 22:08, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

impeached on December 19 ??
So, why does it say on this CNN video  December 18  ??? What is correct ? http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a2e_1229624865 79.210.90.190 (talk) 22:17, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia Is Not A Place To Hype Any Political Party
This page was written more like a Republican campaign ad than a neutral non-partisan page. You keep your political views to yourself and don't hide details about how others judged Gore's loss. You need to include every logical detail, and not hide any scenario, like how this page did. You need to include what Clinton and other commentators argued, and not just what Gore argued. The same Stanford page that was used to trash Clinton as a liability to Gore included different hypothesis' of the election, and not just Clinton's personal record being a liability.204.169.161.1 (talk) 19:46, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Last two sections
The last two sections in the current article, "Ensuing events for 13 House managers" and "Other affairs", seem kind of coatracky to me. Other than the one of the 13 House managers who lost his bid for re-election in 2000, all of them left the House under circumstances that seem to have very little to do with the Clinton impeachment, so why spend so much time chronicling that? Also, the fact that Republican officials have also had affairs is of limited relevance, as Clinton was not impeached for adultery. Certainly there is a place to mention politicians whose affairs were revealed in connection with the impeachment (e.g., the Flynt episode), but a general list of adulterous Republicans seems out of line. Thoughts? --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 17:49, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Well the republicans presented impeachment as a moral argument, and did everything they could to keep the sexual aspects prominent in the media. So their own lack of morality is completely relevant.  Clinton was impeached for lying about adultery - the republicans were never asked to testify about their own adultery, and we can only guess how many of them would have lied had they thought they could have gotten away with it. Algr (talk) 22:20, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

It Is Worth Noting That Media Outlets Gave The Impression That They Were In Favor of Bush During The 2000 Presidential Election And Could've Exaggerated Things In An Effort To Help Him Win
That poll that showed half of Americans supported the decision to impeach Clinton was conducted by in part by CNN and USA Today- two media outlets that were accused of putting an effort to help Bush win the 2000 Presidential election- in December of 1999, when Bush and Gore were campaigning, and it may have very well been just conducted to garner support for Bush. It very well may have not been a random survey and they could've knowingly surveyed the bulk of the respondents from pro-Republican areas. Bush raised more money than Gore when he campaigned and the media has had a history of siding with the candidate who raises the most money. My resources are quite neutral and are not biased. They even sourced various news articles that made false claims about Al Gore.75.72.35.253 (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2012 (UTC) I should've mentioned earlier that one of the sources included was FAIR, an organization known for grading media bias.75.72.35.253 (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

My Edits Were Not Poorly Sourced And Were Quite Neutral
My sources were CNN, Infoplease and the University of Missouri Kansas City. Drmies, I suggest you accept the consensus policy and keep your views to yourself.75.72.35.253 (talk) 03:29, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

I believe this article should be entitled "Attempted Impeachment of Bill Clinton". To call it "Impeachment of Bill Clinton" is to wrongly, purposefully or accidentally, state that he was impeached when in fact he was not. It should be called "Attempted impeachment of Bill Clinton", then go into detail of how he was voted to be impeached by the House of Representatives, but not by the Senate, thus making the impeachment of Clinton unsuccessful. This is writing, and in writing you must state things exactly as they are, not by what you meant or what you were trying to imply. The current title of this article is 100% unequivocally misguided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.251.112.134 (talk) 19:30, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Impeachment is not removal from office; impeachment is the initiation of the trial process by bringing formal charges. Please read the wiki article on impeachment. Your understanding of impeachment is flawed. Clinton was impeached, but not convicted. If it helps, try mentally substituting "brought to court on charges" for "impeached". Being brought up on charges is not the saem thing as being convicted. You can be aquitted, but that doesn't change the fact you were brought to court. 76.238.186.96 (talk) 00:23, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Was the impeachment illegal?
Those of us who know the Constitution well know that it takes a 2/3rds vote in the US House to impeach (indict) the President or a Supreme Court justice and, after a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (for the President), a 2/3rds vote in the US Senate for removal. Did one of the Amendments of the Constitution change the rules to require a simply majority vote in the House for impeachment?

 * While a two-thirds majority is required for conviction, a simple majority is the default in the House of Representatives. The relevant clauses in Article I are: Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5: "The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment." and Article 1, Section 3, Clauses 6 and 7: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried the Chief Justice shall preside; And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present." NW ( Talk ) 16:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Bias / Unsupported claims?
"Although the impeachment and trial was broadly unpopular with the public, Clinton's personal image suffered and Vice President Al Gore distanced himself from Clinton, which assisted George W. Bush in his successful presidential campaign against Gore in 2000."

That seems like a lot of opinion with no source references to back it up:

"the trial was broadly unpopular with the public" - says who?

"Clinton's personal image suffered" - according to what measures?

"Gore distanced himself from Clinton" - proof?

"which assisted Bush in his successful campaign against Gore" - implying cause and effect between the prior statement, and cause and effect on the subsequent campaign. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.18.235 (talk) 04:08, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Unclear lede
Except for the article title, the lede of this article is extremely unclear on the fact that Bush was eventually aquitted. Maybe another editor loking over the article can revamp the text to make it more representative and clear?

Cheers, Soni (talk) 00:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

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


text:
User talk:Crosbiesmith

Thanks
71.197.166.72 (talk) 20:54, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Zlatoust Machine-Building Plant

The article Zlatoust Machine-Building Plant has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline and the more detailed Notability (companies) requirement. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back. Thank you,

While all constructive 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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:51, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Just to let you know
You have been mentioned at Missing Wikipedians. Ottawahitech (talk) 02:20, 4 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

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

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Historic-scotland-link
Template:Historic-scotland-link has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. EdwardUK (talk) 01:55, 1 March 2019 (UTC)

"Devon Great Consols" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect &. Since you had some involvement with the "Devon Great Consols" redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:37, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of World Gold Council

The article World Gold Council has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Cites its organization website. No excessive notability on its own."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. NotReallySoroka (talk) 01:58, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

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

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

"Vladislav Surkov (Template)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Vladislav Surkov (Template) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Randi Moth (talk) 13:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

"John C. Whitehead (Template)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect John C. Whitehead (Template) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:12, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

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

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

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

title: User talk:Crosbiesmith


text:
USS Sterett (DD-27)

USS Sterett (DD-27) was a modified Paulding-class destroyer in the United States Navy during World War I. She was the first ship named for Andrew Sterett.

Sterett was laid down on 22 March 1909 at Quincy, Massachusetts, by the Fore River Shipbuilding Company. Sponsored by Miss Dorothy Rosalie Sterett Gittings, the destroyer was launched on 12 May 1910 and commissioned on 15 December 1910 at Boston, Massachusetts.

Pre-World War I
Each year until 1913, Sterett operated along the east coast out of Boston from April to December and, from January to April, participated in training and battle exercises out of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Though placed in reserve on 5 November 1913, she continued duty with the torpedo fleet. On 20 January 1914, she sailed from Charleston, South Carolina, and reached New Orleans, Louisiana, on 2 March, after stops at Cape Canaveral, Miami, Key West, Florida, and at Mobile, Alabama. The following day, she joined the newly created Reserve Torpedo Flotilla, operating in the Gulf of Mexico out of Galveston, Texas. In June, she returned to the Atlantic seaboard, this time based at Norfolk, Virginia, and resumed coastal patrols and Caribbean exercises. Sterett's complement was reduced on 5 January 1916 and, throughout that spring; she operated almost exclusively in the Caribbean.

On 1 June, she was a part of the fleet which landed and supported the Marines at Monte Cristi, Dominican Republic, and marched to Santiago to restore order and to protect lives and property. Soon thereafter, Sterett returned to Norfolk and resumed operations along the east coast. On 1 January 1917, she entered the Mississippi, stopped at New Orleans, and steamed up river to Vicksburg, Mississippi. She reentered the gulf and patrolled the Texas coast until she was shifted to Key West on 18 March. From there, the destroyer ranged as far as the Cuban coast.

World War I
In April 1917, the United States entered World War I, and by 9 June, Sterett was in Queenstown, Ireland. Throughout the remainder of the war, she operated from Queenstown to meet convoys and conduct them to either Berehaven, Ireland, or to Devonport, England. At these points, British and French destroyers assumed responsibility for the last leg of the voyage. A little less than a year after her arrival at Queenstown, on 31 May 1918, Sterett was herding a convoy toward the rendezvous point when she came upon a surfaced U-boat. As Sterett closed, the submarine rapidly submerged. Sterett began dropping depth charges furiously, and air bubbles and oil soon appeared on the surface, indicating damage to the German raider.

After exhausting her supply of depth charges, Sterett pursued the enemy by the U-boat's wake of bubbles and trail of oil, hoping to force her to exhaust her batteries and air supply. She continued the pursuit through the night, guided in the darkness only by the fumes of the sub's leaking oil. Finally, at dawn, the destroyer's persistence was rewarded. She sighted the U-boat on the surface about 1000 yd ahead. Sterett sliced through the waves at top speed seeking to ram the submarine, but the U-boat countered by swinging hard to port. Sterett passed within 20 ft of the submarine and, as the U-boat attempted to dive, brought her guns to bear. However, without sufficient time to bracket their adversary, Sterett's gunners watched helplessly as the submarine slid beneath the surface and escaped. For their dogged determination, the officers and men of Sterett received the commendation of the Commander-in-Chief, Coast of Ireland.

The year 1918 brought with it an all-out effort on the part of the Central Powers to bring the war to a successful conclusion. The German Navy increased the intensity of its submarine operations in order to free Germany from the Allies' ever-tightening blockade. In response to this thrust, Sterett maintained a grueling schedule of convoy duty-a week or more at sea followed by a day or two in port. One of her new techniques, the use of airborne surveillance, presaged modern hunter-killer antisubmarine warfare.

Inter-war period
The Allies prevailed, however, and the Armistice, signed on 11 November, brought an end to Sterett's strenuous duty; and, by 3 January 1919, she was back in the United States at Charleston. From there, she moved to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she was decommissioned on 9 December. On 9 March 1935, after a little more than 15 years of inactivity, Sterett was struck from the Naval Vessel Register. On 28 June, she was sold for scrapping to M. Black and Company of Norfolk, Virginia.

title: USS Sterett (DD-27)


text:
Dumb (Nirvana song)

"Dumb" is a song by the American rock band, Nirvana, written by vocalist and guitarist, Kurt Cobain. It is the sixth song on the band's third and final studio album, In Utero, released in 1993.

The In Utero version features a cello part, written and performed by Chicago musician Kera Schaley, a friend of the album's producer, Steve Albini. Schaley never toured with the band, but all live versions of the song during the In Utero tour featured cello, performed by Lori Goldston during the American leg of the tour, and Melora Creager during the European leg.

Despite never being released as a single, "Dumb" reached number 37 on the US Alternative National Airplay chart, which was published by the Billboard sister publication, Radio & Records. In October 2023, an animated music video for the song by RuffMercy was released on Nirvana's official YouTube channel, to promote the 30th anniversary of In Utero.

Early history
"Dumb" was written by Cobain in the summer of 1990, as the band began to move away from the heavier grunge sound of their debut album, Bleach, towards more openly melodic, pop-influenced material. Two lyrics sheets for the song were published posthumously in Journals in November 2002, one under the working title of "I Think I'm Dumb," with a note that the lyrics were "Not Finished," and the titles of two songs by Scottish rock band the Vaselines, "Molly's Lips" and "Slushy," written under the title with no explanation. In a 2023 interview, Courtney Love stated that Cobain had written the song in just 20 minutes, during a trip to Amsterdam.

"Dumb" was debuted live on September 25, 1990, when Cobain performed a solo acoustic version on the Boy Meets Girl show, hosted by Calvin Johnson of the American rock band Beat Happening, on KAOS (FM) in Olympia, Washington. The first live version featuring the full band was at the Off Ramp Café in Seattle, Washington on November 25, 1990.

On September 3, 1991, the band recorded a version of the song, already featuring finished lyrics, during their second John Peel session for the BBC at Maida Vale Studios in London. The full session, which also featured versions of "Drain You" and "Endless Nameless" from their then-latest release, Nevermind, was produced by Dale Griffin, and first broadcast on November 3, 1991. "Dumb" and "Endless, Nameless" from this session were posthumously released on the Nirvana rarities box set, With the Lights Out, in November 2004.

Three studio versions of "Dumb" were recorded by Jack Endino on October 26, 1992, at Word of Mouth in Seattle, Washington, but all were instrumental, as were all the other songs recorded during this session, except for one take of the eventual In Utero single, "Rape Me". One of these instrumental takes was released on the 20th anniversary "Deluxe" and "Super Deluxe" editions of In Utero in September 2013.

In Utero
The final studio version of "Dumb" was recorded by Steve Albini at Pachyderm Studios in Cannon Falls, Minnesota in February 1993, during the recording sessions for In Utero. The song's guitar, bass and drums were recorded on February 15, the third day of the sessions. All vocals for the album were recorded by Cobain during a single session the following day.

In a 2013 interview for the audio series Spotify Landmark, Albini recalled replacing drummer Dave Grohl's bass drum on "Dumb" and "Pennyroyal Tea" with a small one "with a full-front head on it, so that it had a very sort of bouncy, jazzy sound, as opposed to the sort of more percussive, more hard rock sound on the rest of the record."

Cello
The In Utero recording of "Dumb" features cello by Kera Schaley, a friend of Albini's who also played on the album's second single and closing track, "All Apologies," as well as an unreleased take of the eventual b-side, "Marigold." As Schaley recalled in a 2010 interview with Swan Fungus, "I went to the studio...and Steve played the song 'Dumb' for me. I wrote a part for it and then Kurt came in and listened, told me what to leave out and what to keep. Then he asked me to play around with 'All Apologies.'" In 2023, she shared her recollection of hearing the song for the first time, telling Rolling Stone's Brian Hiatt, "I remember I heard 'Dumb' and then when Kurt came in, I looked at him and I said, 'This is a really beautiful song.' And I think he might’ve thought that was funny, but he was like, 'Thank you.'" According to Schaley, the final cello line for the song was recorded in about three takes.

Post-In Utero
On November 18, 1993, the band performed an acoustic version of "Dumb" during their MTV Unplugged appearance at Sony Music Studios in New York City. This version featured second guitar by Pat Smear and cello by Lori Goldston, the band's live cellist during the American leg of the In Utero tour.

The song was performed, along with "Serve the Servants," at Nirvana's final television appearance, on February 23, 1994 in Rome, Italy for the RAI television show, Tunnel. This version featured cello by Melora Creager, the live cellist during the European leg of the In Utero tour.

"Dumb" was performed for the final time live at Nirvana's last concert, on March 1, 1994 at Terminal 1 in Munich, Germany.

Music
Journalist Gillian G. Gaar noted that "Dumb" was one of the few Nirvana songs to remain "low-key from beginning to end," comparing it to the Bleach song, "About a Girl." Like "About a Girl," the song has been described as "Beatlesesque." Nirvana bassist Krist Novoselic called it "a beautiful song. That's a really good one. I like the BBC version of the song. It's real raw, but still the beauty is strong. A sweet pop song."

Describing the In Utero version, John Mulvey of the NME wrote that the song "broods and circles, with the aid of a cello, like a baroque parody of 'Lithium'. Again and again it builds up and up, primed to explode into a moshing sweatfest of a chorus, and again and again it ducks away from that commercially lucrative macho bonding rite." Likewise, Jim Bevigilia of American Songwriter wrote that "the recording of the song on In Utero is all coiled tension. Even though you expect Cobain’s guitar to come crashing through to break it, it never quite does. Instead, a cello runs counterpoint to the steady rhythm section of Krist Novoselic and Dave Grohl and to the protagonist’s insistence that maybe he’s happy after all."

Lyrics
In a 1993 interview with Melody Maker, Cobain explained that the song was "just about people who're easily amused, people who not only aren't capable of progressing their intelligence but are totally happy watching 10 hours of television and really enjoy it. I've met a lot of dumb people. They have a shitty job, they may be totally lonely, they don't have a girlfriend, they don't have much of a social life, and yet, for some reason, they're happy."

Though written before Cobain's addiction to heroin, "Dumb" is also one of the few Nirvana songs to directly reference drug use, specifically inhalants. In Cobain's unused liner notes for the song, he blamed "all that supposedly unaddictive, harmless" marijuana for harming his nerves and damaging his memory, saying it "wasn't ever strong enough" which led him to "climb the ladder" to heroin.

In 2015, Kurt's daughter, Frances Bean Cobain, offered her own interpretation of the song in an interview with Rolling Stone, saying, "I cry every time I hear that song. It's a stripped-down version of Kurt's perception of himself – of himself on drugs, off drugs, feeling inadequate to be titled the voice of a generation."

Release and reception
Though never released as a single, "Dumb" has become a popular song on American alternative rock radio, and was played on European radio. It was ranked at number 39 on WHFS's top 100 played songs of 1994, number 41 on KROQ-FM’s top 100 played songs of 1994, number 56 on Q101's top 100 played songs of 1994, and number 82 on 91X's top 100 played songs of 1994. "Dumb" was also ranked at number 381 on Live 105's Top 500 songs in 1994, as well as at number 266 on Live 105's Top 300 Revolutionary songs in 1995, and also at number 220 on WHFS's Top 500 songs of the 90s in 1999. The combined airplay in 1994 allowed the song to chart at number 37 on the US Alternative National Airplay chart which was published by Radio & Records, a sister publication to Billboard.

In a 1993 Rolling Stone interview, Cobain told journalist David Fricke that he wished he had put more songs like "Dumb" and "All Apologies" on previous Nirvana albums, saying that Nirvana had so far "failed in showing the lighter, more dynamic side of our band."

Critical reception
In his review of In Utero for Rolling Stone, Fricke cited "Dumb," along with "Heart-Shaped Box," as evidence that if Generation X "is ever going to have its own Lennon — someone who genuinely believes in rock & roll salvation but doesn't confuse mere catharsis with true deliverance — Cobain is damn near it." Reviewing the album for Kerrang!, Phil Alexander wrote that "Kurt kickstarts Rape Me with a familiar and doubtlessly intended ...Teen Spirit shuffle, while Dumb has an infectious Come As You Are feel. Both ripple with Kurt's poignant observations, allowing fleeting glimpses at his anger and frustration without ever resorting to the trite and obvious."

Legacy
Reviewing the band's first greatest hits album, Nirvana, in 2002, Will Bryant of Pitchfork wrote that "Dumb" was "one of Cobain's most underrated efforts, a populist revision of "Lithium" that replaces Nevermind's misanthropy with earnest self-deprecation." Bryant praised Kera Schaley's cello playing as the song's "secret weapon," and the bridge as "hands down, Cobain's best."

In 2004, "Dumb" was ranked number seven in Q's list of the "10 Greatest Nirvana Songs Ever". In 2011, NME ranked it sixth on their list of the Nirvana's "10 Best Tracks". In 2015, it was listed at number 20 on Rolling Stone's ranking of 102 Nirvana songs. In 2019, The Guardian ranked it ninth on their list of "Nirvana's 20 greatest songs". In 2023, Stephen Thomas Erlewine ranked it the 24th best Nirvana song on the A.V. Club's "Essential Nirvana: Their 30 greatest songs, ranked" list.

"Dumb" was re-released on the band's second greatest hits collection, Icon, in August 2010.

In 2017, to mark what would have been Cobain's 50th birthday, the Phonographic Performance Limited released a list of the top 20 most played Nirvana songs on the TV and radio in the United Kingdom, in which "Dumb" was ranked at number 19.

Music video
On October 13, 2023, an animated music video for "Dumb" was released on Nirvana's official YouTube channel. The video was directed by RuffMercy, and created using hand-painted Super 8 film.

The video was nominated for a 2024 Webby Award for Art & Experimental Videos.

Personnel
Nirvana
 * Kurt Cobain – vocals, guitars
 * Krist Novoselic – bass
 * Dave Grohl – drums

Additional personnel
 * Kera Schaley – cello

Other releases

 * A live version, recorded at the 1992 Reading Festival on October 30, 1992, appeared on Live at Reading, released on CD and DVD in November 2009.

 * A remix of the In Utero version, done by Albini in 2013, appeared on the 20th anniversary "Deluxe" and "Super Deluxe" versions of In Utero.

 * A brief clip of the song, from the band's performance at the Springfield Civic Center in Springfield, Massachusetts on November 10, 1993, appeared on side four of the vinyl version of the live compilation, From the Muddy Banks of the Wishkah, released in November 1996. The clip featured Cobain stopping the song after accidentally repeating the second verse, apologizing to the audience, and then starting again.

 * Two live versions of the song, from the band's concerts at the Great Western Forum in Inglewood, California on December 30, 1993, and at the Seattle Center Arena in Seattle on January 7, 1994, appeared on the 30th anniversary "Super Deluxe" reissue of In Utero, released in October 2023.

Unreleased versions

 * The solo acoustic version recorded on the Boy Meets Girl show in Olympia on September 25, 1990 was leaked on the internet in 2016, but remains unreleased.

 * The live version recorded for Tunnel in Rome on February 23, 1994 also remains unreleased.

Cover versions
In 2016, Best Coast covered the song for Summer Is Forever 2.

title: Dumb (Nirvana song)


text:
National Association Grounds

National Association Grounds was a baseball grounds in Cleveland, Ohio, located at Central Avenue and East 55th Street. It was home to the Cleveland Forest Citys of the National Association in 1871 and 1872, with Cleveland winning five of its sixteen home games. It is considered a major league ballpark by those who count the National Association as a major league.

After many years of use as an amateur baseball field, a new team dubbed Cleveland Forest City moved to the NA Grounds, as members of the short-lived United States Baseball League in 1912. The USL lasted a barely a month before disbanding.

title: National Association Grounds


text:
San Pedro Mountains mummy

The San Pedro Mountains mummy (known informally as "Pedro") is a mummy discovered in Wyoming in the 1930s and since lost. Scientific analyses have concluded that it is the mummy of a Native American infant that was born with anencephaly, but its small size and unusual physical features led to theories that it was an early hominid or that it was related to legends of little people. A similar mummy that was studied in the 1990s has been nicknamed "Chiquita".

Discovery and description
The mummy that became known as Pedro was discovered in either 1932 or 1934 in the San Pedro mountains in Carbon County, Wyoming by two gold prospectors, Cecil Mayne and Frank Carr. After blasting open a cave, on a ledge inside it they discovered a mummified body in a seated position, approximately 6–7 in tall, weighing approximately 1 lbs. Its standing height was estimated at 17 in. The site may be within the Little Man mining claim, near Pathfinder Reservoir.

Subsequent history and analysis
In 1936, Mayne stated in a sworn affidavit that the mummy was then the property of Homer F. Sherrill and was in the Field Museum in Chicago, which has no record of it. Sherrill, a Nebraskan, exhibited it as an early hominid. It was displayed for years in the window of a drug store in Meeteetse, Wyoming. It was purchased in the 1940s by Casper car dealer Ivan Goodman, who mounted it on a wooden base and enclosed it in a domed glass jar and advertised it as a 65-year-old "pygmy", "preserved as it actually lived". In 1950, shortly before his death, Goodman either lost it in New York or, according to a 1979 article in the Casper Star-Tribune, sold it to Leonard Wadler, who later moved to Florida and died there in the 1980s.

Due to its small size and adult appearance, the mummy was related to Shoshone legends of little people called the Nimerigar, and to non-Native American folklore about "pygmy" Indians. In August 1941, the Milwaukee Journal wrote about it in an article headlined "Did a Race of Pygmies Once Live in America?" In 2005, John Adolfi of Granby, New York, offered $10,000 for the mummy, hoping to use it to cast doubt on the established account of human evolution.

The Casper Tribune-Herald reported in 1950 that X-rays of the San Pedro mummy showed adult vertebrae and teeth, and there were reports of solid food in the stomach and of broken bones, but examinations led by Harry L. Shapiro of the American Museum of Natural History in the late 1940s and by Paul Martin of the Field Museum in 1950 concluded that it was an anencephalic infant; the appearance of a miniature adult was the result of the deformed head. George W. Gill of the University of Wyoming saw the X-rays and agreed with this determination, but the films have also been lost.

Second mummy
In 1994, Gill was interviewed about the San Pedro mummy for an episode of the TV show Unsolved Mysteries along with Eugene Bashor, who was seeking evidence of the Nimerigar. A family in Cheyenne who saw the program then came forward with a similar mummy, 4 in high, which had been purchased from a sheepherder in the same region of Wyoming around 1929 and was dubbed "Chiquita". X-rays and DNA testing performed at Ivinson Memorial Hospital in Laramie and Denver Children's Hospital confirmed that it was a naturally mummified anencephalic female infant of Native American ancestry,  and it was carbon-dated to approximately 1500 or 1700. The family then withdrew access to the mummy.

Both mummies are unique among Wyoming Native American burials in being in a seated position, with the arms wrapped around the legs. Chiquita is also unusual for a Native American in being blonde. The only other known mummy of an anencephalic infant is Egyptian.

title: San Pedro Mountains mummy


text:
Talk:Teymur Bakhtiar

This is unlikely that "Mahmoud Panahian" had been War Minsiter of Republic of Azerbaijan. May be this is Democratic Republic of South Azerbaijan led by Jafar Pishevari. Can any body verify this? --Pouya 20:42, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Pouya, You are absolutely right! I had once inserted the word "rebel" before Republic of Azerbaijan, which was removed again later. I take the liberty to execute your valuable suggestion. --Pantherarosa 00:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that autonomy-seeking is a bit more NPOV than rebel.--Pouya 10:16, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Excellent phrasing! --Pantherarosa 22:59, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Teymur Bakhtiar


text:
São Mateus da Calheta

São Mateus da Calheta is a civil parish within the municipality of Angra do Heroísmo in the Portuguese archipelago of the Azores. The population in 2011 was 3,757, in an area of 5.98 km2. It is located on the periphery of the urbanized area of the city of Angra do Heroísmo (approximately four 4 km from the center), and developed from a small fishing port in a bay along the volcanic coast of the island (calheta is Portuguese for small bay).

History
During the early period of settlement, the São Mateus coast was dotted by bays, some peppered with small beaches. One of these, which became known as Prainha, soon became the centre of a small fishing port. Gaspar Frutuoso, writing in his sixth volume of Saudades da Terra, referred to the area as São Mateus da Prainha, noting: "In addition to the church of São Mateus Além, is a small bay of white sand and small stones in places, where on occasion they throw-out their nets and trammels to catch many fish, principally mullet." It was Pedro de Merelim who first coined the name São Mateus da Prainha, in his chapter on the parish, in As 18 paróquias de Angra.

During the 1580s, in anticipation of eventual attacks by forces loyal to King Philip II of Spain, the first forts began to be constructed along the coast: six forts lined the banks of the parishes coast, which included the Grande Fort and the Fort of Negrito. They served the purpose of defending political activities in the archipelago, but also safeguarded the pillaging from pirates and privateers that occurred during this period (which was the justification for the construction of the Fort of the Terreiro, the Fort of the Maré, the Fort of Má Ferramenta and the Fort of São João (São Mateus da Calheta) (also known as the Fort of Biscoitinho). The final defences were completed during the Second World War, with the extension of trenches and installation of gun emplacements.

Father Manuel Luís Maldonado, writing in his work Fenix Nagrense, recounted the penitence of the peoples of the parish, as a sequence of the 26 March 1690 storm and 5 April 1690 earthquake. These accounts explain the strong relationship between the parish of São Mateus and São Bartolomeu de Regatos, and the existence of a parochial church in the vicinity of the old church, the reference to fishing and the level of poverty. Father António Cordeiro, writing in 1710 wrote of large estates, the coastal fortresses (some with more than 9 pieces of artillery), their garrisons and of the community of São Mateus "with more than 50 neighbours" spread across the territory. Cordeiro also wrote of the fishing: "...this bay in São Mateus, of white sand and small pebbles, where they catch a lot of fish, and salmonettes."

The primitive parochial church, constructed at Ponta de S. Mateus around 1557, would substitute the older chapel. During the construction, the people returned to the smaller Hermitage of Luz to complete the weekly rituals. The new church (today known as the Old Church) was completed in 1700, and functioned in that role until a 28 August 1893 hurricane when the church was destroyed and abandoned. Between 1694 and 1700 the church was demolished and reconstructed farther to the interior: a cross was left in the former churchyard. Writing in 1834, Luís de Meireles do Canto e Castro, a local resident, complained of the poor protection the seawall offered, resulting in repeated encroachments by the sea.

During the 18th century and early 19th century, the population grew rapidly and the first defensive structure began appearing along the Terreiro and beach near the port. After the 18th century the character of the parish began to change: the population grew and much of the economic activity moved away the orchards of the local estates.

Geography
The civil parish occupies a small triangular territory along the southern coast of Terceira, confined in the south by the sea, west by the civil parish of São Bartolomeu de Regatos, northeast by Terra Chã and east by São Pedro.

Physical geography
The territory extends through the transition al zone within the Santa Bárbara massif and volcanic complex of the Serra do Morião, in a zone that is relatively low, with a slope of less than five percent grade until 170 m elevation, along a north-northwest tract. The highest point in the parish is situated in the extreme north of Canada da Cruz Dourada along Canada de Trás. In the central part of the territory is the basaltic spatter cone Pico dos Merens: its peak is named after one of the local families who, for centuries, were local property-owners in the region: the Merens of Távora. Also known as Pico de Merens or Pico do Alvernaz, the cone is 104 m elevation, and responsible for the Biscoitinho Platform that extends to the sea.

The Biscoitinho Platform, over which the main built-up part of the civil parish is situated, terminates at small rectangular promontory 300 m consisting of several coves and bays. One of these bays, which is relatively deep, provided shelter for early settlers from western and southwestern weather systems, giving rise to the port of São Mateus. Another cove to the west, which is wider and open to the sea, resulted in the settlement of Terreiro. To the east and west of the Biscoitinho Platform the coast is low, with altitudes less than 10 m, consisting of basalt primarily, with some pyroclasts. The exception is the zone of Ponta de São Mateus, near the old church, where the coast is covered in a thick layer of ignimbrites.

To the east of the port there two areas, Baía das Mercês and Poço da Luz, where the coast is almost level with the sea, and where stone beaches are common. Historically, there have been records of tsunamis or southerly swells that have inundated the areas (the last occurring on 18 February 2003), while the area the territory is delimited by wall to protect the roadway.

West, after the Calheta do Terreiro, the coast extends further into the sea, yet still only less than 10 m above sea level, forming the tip of São Mateus. Being on the coast, the area is influenced by Atlantic storms, resulting in the construction of various barriers. In the small bay of Negrito, historically defended by the Fort of Negrito and location of a former whaling port, are the principal swimming areas on the island. After Negrito is the western limit of the civil parish in the area known as Chanoca, an area of basalt cliffs with difficult access.

Human geography
The structure of São Mateus is different from other parishes in the southwest corner of Terceira, with a specific economy associated with fishing and services. While the upper regions of the parish has marked by rural character, the central area is primarily urban, centred around the parochial church and fishing community. The parish contains the localities Bairro Novo, Canada da Cruz Dourada, Canada da Igreja, Canada do Capitão Mor, Canada do Pombal, Canada dos Calços, Canada dos Folhadais, Canada Francesa, São Mateus and Terra Pão. These 50 named agglomerations are connected by a patchwork of linear roadways extending from the Estrada Regional E.R.1-1ª, organized into:
 * São Mateus — the main village, centred on Biscoitinho and port, includes a dense urban concentration with numerous roads and cul de sacs, characterized by the homes of the poor and fishermen. Towards the west the agglomeration abruptly terminates at Terreiro, limited by the zone of Arrife, which is almost underpopulated, except for the homes of the early gentry and noble classes of Angra. In the east, towards Angra do Heroísmo, the urban area extends along the coast, broken by the Fortress of São Mateus da Calheta, towards the social housing of the Bairro dos Pescadores constructed during the Estado Novo regime. The construction of social housing in Terreiro, the periphery of the Bairro dos Pescadores and beginning of the Canada da Arruda resulted in a high urban density, giving the parish the character of an extension of Angra. In the extreme east of the parish, in the zone between Poço da Luz and the border with São Pedro, are many of the 18th and 19th century estates that pertained to the aristocratic families of Terceira;
 * Cantinho — this is the secondary urban agglomeration of the parish, characterized by linear growth along the route between Angra and São Bartolomeu dos Regatos (known as the Caminho do Meio). Its center is situated at the Hermitage of São Francisco das Almas, a name that once served as the toponymic reference, but actually includes Entre-Ladeiras, Terra do Pão and Canada da Francesa. It is a zone that is markedly rural, inhabited by farmers and similar to the parishes of the western part of the island, and socially separate from the rest of the parish, with its own primary school, império and parochial churches.;
 * The Canadas — connecting the coastal roadway (or Caminho de Baixo) with the Angra-São Bartolomeu dos Regatos access (Caminho do Meio) are several secondary lines of residences known as Canadas da Luz, da Arruda, do Capitão-Mor and da Cruz Dourada, that were extended linearly along these roads. These were transitional spaces, lightly populated, between the coastal fishing communities and their rural interior. These Canadas were transformed into new extensions of Angra, as bedroom communities.

Military

 * Fort of Negrito (Forte de Negrito)
 * Fortress of São Mateus da Calheta (Forte Grande de São Mateus)
 * Fort of the Church of São Mateus da Calheta (Forte da Igreja de São Mateus da Calheta)

Religious

 * Church of São Mateus da Calheta (Igreja Paroquial de São Mateus da Calheta/Igreja de São Mateus)
 * Church of São Mateus da Calheta (Old) (Igreja Velha de São Mateus da Calheta), dating to the mid 16th-century, the Igreja Velha (Old Church) was built to replace the old hermitage of Nossa Senhora da Luz, but its location (along the coast) made it susceptible to winter storms and hurricanes; on 28 August 1893, it was hit by a hurricane resulting in the destruction of most of its roof, and its eventual abandon. It was replaced by the main parochial church.
 * Império do Espírito Santo do Cantinho
 * Império do Espírito Santo do Terreiro
 * Império do Espíritu Santo de São Mateus da Calheta, a Holy Spirit Chapel dating from 1873

title: São Mateus da Calheta


text:
Parchim

Parchim (Mecklenburgisch-Vorpommersch: Parchen) is a town in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Germany. It is the capital of the Ludwigslust-Parchim district. It was the birthplace of Helmuth von Moltke the Elder, to whom a monument was erected in 1876.

Founded about 1210, it was the seat of the short-lived Lordship of Parchim-Richenberg, a partition of the Duchy of Mecklenburg, from 1226 until 1248 when the lord relocated to Richenberg. Parchim was absorbed into the Lordship of Werle in 1255. In 1277 Werle was partitioned and Parchim became the seat of Werle-Parchim until it was reunited with Werle-Güstrow in 1307. One branch of the family of the duke of Mecklenburg resided in Parchim during part of the 14th century. It became a prosperous industrial town during the 16th century, but this prosperity was destroyed by the Thirty Years' War.

Population development

 * 1648 – 1,300
 * 1789 – 4,000
 * 1830 – 5,800
 * 1850 – 6,270
 * 1910 – 12,804
 * 1939 – 16,000
 * 1974 – 23,000
 * 1990 – 23,800
 * 2000 – 20,048
 * 2005 – 19,348

Sport
Motorcycle speedway is held at the Mecklenburgring, in the north west outskirts of the town off the Dammer Weg. The club Motorsportclub Mecklenburgring Parchim e.V. organise race meetings at the site and between 2002 and 2005, the team merged with Speedway Wolfslake and won the 2004 Bundesliga as RG Parchim/Wolfslake.

Notable residents

 * Johann Jakob Engel (1741–1802), author.
 * Helmuth von Moltke the Elder (1800-1891), Prussian general field marshal, honorary citizen.
 * Rudolf Tarnow (1867-1933), low German writer
 * Elise Blumann (1897-1990), German-Australian expressionist painter
 * Friedrich Hildebrandt (1898–1948), German SS Obergruppenführer, Gauleiter, executed for war crimes
 * Ernst Goldenbaum (1898-1990), politician, chairman of the DBD and Minister of Agriculture and Forestry of the GDR, 1949-1990
 * Éric Weil (1904-1977), self described as a post-Hegelian Kantian philosopher, studied violence
 * Heinrich Alexander Stoll (1910-1977), author of adventure and historical novels.
 * Hans-Wilhelm Ebeling (1934-2021), Lutheran clergyman and politician, chairman of the DSU, Minister for Economic Cooperation, 1990
 * HA Schult (born 1939), object and action artist
 * Jana Gerisch (born 1978), volleyball player
 * Stefanie Weichelt (born 1983), football player
 * Laura Larsson, (DE Wiki) (born 1989), podcast and radio host

title: Parchim


text:
Bryant, Washington

Bryant is a census-designated place (CDP) in Snohomish County, Washington, United States. The population was 1,870 at the 2010 census.

A post office called Bryant was established in 1893, and remained in operation until 1954. The community most likely took its name from the Bryant Lumber and Shingle Company.

Geography
Bryant is located at 48.24833°N, -122.17444°W (48.248420, -122.174430).

According to the United States Census Bureau, the CDP has a total area of 6.175 square miles (15.99 km$2$), of which, 6.141 square miles (15.91 km$2$) of it is land and 0.034 square miles (0.09 km$2$) of it (0.55%) is water.

title: Bryant, Washington


text:
Kolchuga

Kolchuga may refer to

 * Chainmail in Ukrainian and Russian.
 * Kolchuga passive sensor - the Ukrainian Passive Early Warning Radar

title: Kolchuga