text:
Talk:Historical background of the New Testament/Archive 8

Discussion of Summary
This page, at the time of writing is pushing 131K

This is despite the fact that 5 sections of the page are simply summaries.

In order to reduce the page size, and improve readability, this section summarises the summaries themselves.

In addition it summarises a further summary of summaries and the disputes made of that, and the disputes about the disputes, together with an off-topic discussion.

The original text this summary replaces can be viewed at archive 6. Archive 6 contains the summaries that this replaces NOT the text that the summaries themselves replace, these can be viewed at archives 2-5.

It is not in chronological order, but instead ordered by topic for ease of viewing

This summary was made by CheeseDreams, who asserts that in their opinion it is NPOV. This undoubtably will be disputed.

Any disputed paragraphs or sentences, or locations where others demand additions into the summary are marked (0) where this marking corresponds to the section about the dispute which follows after the summary.

Terminology

 * The area should be called "Palestine" or something similar (4 votes against 2)
 * is it more important that Roman Palestine did not exist at the time in question
 * or is it more important that Palestine is the only term covering the whole area

 * The area should be referred to as "Roman Palestine" (7 votes against 1)

 * "pharisees were considered living saints" is either not accurate or inapropriate best wording (4 votes)

 * "at the time of Christ" is an inappropriate phrase (1 vote against 1)
 * "at this time" is an acceptable phrase to replace "at the time of Christ" (7 votes against none)

 * dispute on translation of "Jonathan" and "John"
 * "Yonatan" is "Jonathan"
 * "Yohanan" is "John"
 * "Yohanan" is "Jonathan"
 * King David's associate "Jonathan" is "Yohanan" in Hebrew
 * The New Testament is (koine) Greek

Methodology

 * dispute on the matter of prime sources
 * Mentioning the Gospels as prime historic source is NPOV
 * Biblical and western historians exclusively should be cited
 * Citing makes the text unapproachable to a general reader
 * The Gospels are not prime historic source for this perion
 * Citations should (if they are going to appear at all) not just be from Christians or the west.
 * Many people find the historiography of the gospels as highly dubious
 * There are only 3 points of view: Christians, skeptics, critical scholars
 * The Mishnah was not really edited until 200AD
 * There are Jews, Muslims, Talmud Scholars, historians, archaeologists, and many others
 * We must explain how historiography works.
 * There are too many citations
 * The Mishnah existed in oral form before 200AD

Jesus and the Article(s)

 * This article should not be merged with Jesus and textual evidence or Historicity of Jesus (general consensus vs. 1 objection)

 * The title should not be changed into The historical Jesus (4 votes against 1)

 * "the article, is neither about Christianity nor religion ...(it)... is about the culture and events..." (5 votes against 2)

Unopposed statement by Pedant
 * This article is about what its title says it is. ... It is only about the history and culture of the region as it bears on the (real or imaginary) person: Jesus, the central figure in Christian Theology. Anything that conflicts ... does not belong in THIS article.

 * This article should mention Jesus at least a non-zero amount (1st vote - 5 votes against 2) (2nd vote - 2 votes against 2)

 * This article is more background to 1st Century Roman Palestine than cross-referenced summary of Jesus' life (1st vote - 2 votes against 1) (2nd vote - 2 votes against 3)
 * Is this article the background to 1st Century Roman Palestine with asides if something is needed to understand Jesus' life
 * Is this article summarising Jesus' life, and cross referencing it to historical and cultural information about 1st Century Roman Palestine

 * Mild support for specific asides about things that happened to Jesus (vote-1:3 votes against 2) (vote-2:3 votes against 3) (vote-3: 4 votes against 1 (+1 both sides))
 * Should the article be split to make this a non-issue

 * The article should not be split into "background" and "Jesus in it" (general consensus against 1 vote)

 * is it better to have 2 articles
 * one mainly avoiding Jesus in 1st century Palestine and discussing background instead (keeping the title)
 * one predominantly about Jesus in 1st century Palestine and mildly the background (The historical Jesus )

 * or a single article including both

Structure of the article

 * This article should not just be a historical narrative (majority consensus, though with a large minority disputing it)
 * The article should be an historical narrative with asides
 * The article should be structured into topics such as Political situation (regional rulers, high priests, notable militaristic action), Religious organizations (major schools, prophets, messianic groups), Later developments (political control, emergence of more modern Judaism and Christianity)

 * discussion of historical narrative approach
 * 1 dimensional
 * written as if Christianity is the climax of historical events, which is POV
 * style reflects only Christian views of what is important to discuss about the background
 * history and culture are entwined, seperation is a fallacy
 * far too much history
 * it reads better
 * it lacks material

 * discussion of topical approach
 * standard encyclopedia style
 * different aspects highlighted and discussed seperately
 * not orientated around Christian views of what is important
 * mass redundancy by seperating history and culture
 * no-scholars use this approach
 * many scholars use this approach
 * journalists consider this approach more approachable for the general reader
 * organised in line with the article's title which contains the words "Cultural and"

 * dispute on structure within the topical approach
 * "political situation" should be the same section as "religious organizations", "major schools", and "prophets"
 * "notable uprisings" and "messiahs" should be the same section
 * "political situation" means who is in charge
 * putting "notable uprisings" and "messiahs" together only makes sense as an essay, not an encyclopedia
 * "uprisings" are politics not religion
 * Although seperating politics and religion is a modern thing, so are the audience of the encyclopedia

Introductary Paragraphs

 * "According to most Christians, Jesus lived in the first century in Judea" is POV not NPOV (3 votes against 1)

Should the article (as its starting point)
 * Introduction should comment that some dispute historicity (5 votes against 1)
 * The article should assume Jesus exists as its starting point
 * The article should not make assumption of historicity or non-historicity

 * Agreement that the basis for the first paragraph should be (5 votes to 2 (proposal A) to 1 (proposal B))
 * "Jesus is [traditionally/usually] held to have lived in the first century in Judea. Without addressing Jesus existence as an actual historic figure, this article discusses the cultural and political forces active at that time. see: Historicity of Jesus for information relating to the existence of Jesus as a historical figure."

 * The intro mentioned above makes clear that the existence of Jesus is not being asserted (8 votes against 1 digression)

 * The 1st and 2nd introductory sentences should be recast (input from 6 persons)
 * The main record of the life of Jesus are the Gospels, in the Christian New Testament. These sources place Jesus in what became Roman Palestine (modern Israel and Palestine) during the early 1st century.

 * The 3rd sentence should become (2 votes against 1)
 * The article Historicity of Jesus covers debates regarding the existence of Jesus, but if so then it is agreed by most Christians and academics who hold this view that it is necessary to understand the cultural and historical background in which Jesus is thought to have lived.

 * The 4th sentence should become (general consensus)
 * This was a volatile period marked by cultural and political dilemmas. Out of the Roman occupation of Palestine sprang two of the modern world's religions: Christianity and Rabbinic Judaism.

 * subsequent discussion after User X, without being requested, produced a competing version
 * The non-User-X version is balanced, neutral, and appropriate
 * User X (and supporters) thinks their version is better
 * User X thinks their version should absorb the other

Prior History of Palestine

 * dispute over the existance of sacrifice
 * Stating that in most ancient near-eastern societies sacrifice was the only worship is derogatory
 * Stating that in most ancient near-eastern societies sacrifice was the only worship is POV
 * Stating that in most ancient near-eastern societies sacrifice was the only worship is accurate
 * Stating that in most ancient near-eastern societies sacrifice was the only worship is a lie
 * Stating that in most ancient near-eastern societies sacrifice was the only worship is offensive

 * dispute over the validity of the claim of a "dual core"
 * Having a Temple, Torah, Priests, and Scribes, together with having a King ruling by divine right implies a "dual core"
 * Current "scholarship" implies there was not a "dual core"

 * dispute over the 1st and 2nd temple periods
 * There could be a better transition between the 1st and 2nd temple periods,
 * in the 1st and 2nd temple period, both Temple and Law were important.
 * There is no known source for the 1st Temple period which is not suspect of having political spin
 * Excessive detail about the "First Temple" Era and the "Second Temple" Era is irrelevant
 * It is not even known from non-Biblical sources if there was a 1st Temple period
 * There was discontinuity which should be stressed between the 1st and 2nd temple period
 * There needs to be detailed background to the background of Saducees, Pharisees, Temple, Monarchy, and Torah

 * Discussion of the Hasmonians
 * The Hasmonaeans claiming first the high priesthood (under Jonathan) and then the kingship (under Aristobulus I) should be mentioned
 * It is a little confusing to me to call the Hasmonean kingdom the second kingdom.
 * We can be clearer that the Pharisees developed under the Hasmoneans.

 * Herod's reign should be mentioned
 * It should explain who Antipater the Idumaean was
 * It should explain how Herod was Idumaean and a Jew simultaneously

Governance

 * dispute over Jewish reaction to Hellenism
 * Greeks thought circumcision was an abomination
 * Implications of the idea of a universal God are important
 * The Jews thought nakedness was an abomination
 * An emotional quote from Pearlman indicates how jews felt at the the time about Hellenism
 * Implications of the idea of a universal God are irrelevant
 * There was a split between hellenized and "traditional" Jews
 * Implications of Greek interest in Judaism are irrelevant
 * An unemotional quote from Cohen indicates how jews felt at the the time about Hellenism
 * The view that there was a split between hellinized and "traditional" Jews is anachronistic and simplistic.
 * Implications of Greek interest in Judaism are important

 * dispute over the nature of the region
 * The middle east was a "powderkeg" with religious aggression contained by secularity just like today
 * The middle east has never not been a "powderkeg"
 * The middle east forms the bridge between persia, greece, and egypt
 * The middle east's position between major empires, throughout history, inevitably gave it "powderkeg" status
 * The middle east was not a "powderkeg"

 * a discussion of the status of sedition is important

 * dispute over reasons for Jewish antaganism toward rome
 * The desire by Jews not to integrate was seen as an affront by Romans
 * A modern historian claims it is not true that the lack of desire to integrate was seen as an affront
 * Romans were tolerant of beliefs
 * Rome (and Greece) was not secular
 * Jews were more offended by taxes than Roman opinions on belief
 * By 1 CE, the Roman Empire was somewhat more corrupt than it had been
 * There should be a section about economy and class inequality
 * It is necessary to understand the Macabees to comprehend how Jews react to Rome
 * religious and cultural differences escalated into conflicts with secular governance by Rome
 * It is not true that early emporers thrived but later ones were cruel and murdered
 * By 1 CE, the Roman Empire was no more corrupt than it had ever been
 * Rome (and Greece) had a religious and cultural agenda
 * Early emporers thrived, later ones were cruel and murdered, which demonstrates that there was more corruption

Religious Groups

 * dispute over whether judaism always had two sides
 * There were always 2 sides to Judaism - temple vs. halakhah/prayer
 * Prayer is a form of temple worship
 * Halakha contains ritual
 * Halakha contains specifically prayer-related ritual
 * Prayer is independant to temple worship (which had to occur 3 times a year)
 * Temple worship (but not the temple) goes back to 1500-1300BC
 * Halakha goes back orally before it was written down

 * dispute over nature of the priesthood and pharisees
 * In Judaism, the priesthood was more administrative than acting as intermediary between Jews and God
 * The nature of the Pharisees changed over time
 * In Judaism, the priesthood was more acting as intermediary between Jews and God than administrative
 * The nature of the Pharisees remained relatively stable and constant

 * dispute over nature of the essenes, zealots, and lesser groups
 * There was a multi-party system with at least 4 large "schools of thought"
 * Essenes and Zealots only developed later
 * There was a two-party system (Sadducees vs. Pharisees) with minor additional factions
 * Essenes developed at virtually the same time as, or only shortly after, the Pharisees

 * Dispute about Militant Fundamentalists
 * The Sicarii rejected Roman rule but also rejected Jewish government.
 * The Sicarii were a fanatical underground militant wing of the Zealots
 * The primary target of the Sicarii were Jewish elites, not Romans.
 * The Sicarii were independant of the Zealots
 * We need to add more information about the Sicarii.

Other Messiahs
One (and only one) speaker opposed detailed listing of the known movements in this section
 * Other groups who believed in different Messiah figures should be mentioned (8 votes)

 * Contemporary understanding of the meaning of messiah should be included (general uncontested consensus)
 * It is important to state that kings and priests were anointed
 * It is unacceptable (and meaningless) to use the terms annointed king and annointed priest

Uncontested statement
 * In Judaism, "Messiah" means "annointed". It was the symbol of high office. There were two officers routinely annointed this way - a priest messiah, and a king messiah. The hope of a "messiah" to save them would usually have meant simply, some king or priest who would stand up to the romans or whoever was felt oppressing them at the time. The meaning of "Messiah" in christianity, that of a godhead, a unique being who would save them in the sense of salvation, was not part of Judaism, though it may have formed part of the hopes or mystic beliefs of some cults or splinter groups.

Undisputed statement by User:FT2
 * The phrase "Son of Man" is not always apocalyptic (1 vote (+3 informal) no other votes)
 * Many historians claim that Jesus himself did not claim to be a "messiah" in any way unlike other messiahs.

 * dispute over the meaning of "saviour of Israel"
 * there is no evidence anyone thought that a messiah would be a saviour of Israel
 * many expected to be saved from the judgement of God
 * the expectation of a messiah was the expectation of a saviour of Israel
 * many considered the Romans to be the judgement of God
 * the articles Mosiach and Messiah explain the understanding of the term

 * discussion of the paragraph on other messiahs
 * A compromise text was developed
 * One user (user X) produced an alternative proposal
 * A new compromise text is proposed taking into account elements of User X's proposal
 * User X disputes elements of the compromise text
 * User X proposes a 2nd alternative text
 * Some users dispute the willingness of User X to collaborate
 * A new compromise text is proposed taking into account discussions around User X's 2nd proposal
 * User X disputes elements of the compromise text and considers their own proposal superior
 * A new compromise text is proposed taking into account discussions around User X's comments
 * User X disputes elements of the compromise text
 * A new compromise text is proposed taking into account discussions around User X's comments
 * User X restates their intolerance of elements of the compromise text
 * User X restates their 2nd alternative text
 * A new compromise text is proposed taking into account suggestions from User X and others
 * The new text is voted on after "packing the house" has occurred.
 * The result of the vote is (2 supporting the compromise text, 5 against it)

 * dispute on Mandaeans and John the baptist
 * Mandaeans first came into existance in the 2nd/3rd centuries BC
 * There is no evidence that Mandaeans were followers of John the baptist
 * Mandaeans considered John the baptist a messiah
 * Mandaeans first came into existance in the 2nd/3rd centuries AD
 * Mandaeans were followers of John the baptist
 * John the baptist was Nazorean
 * Mandaean was a dialaect at this time
 * Mandaean is a modern synonym for Nazorean
 * Modern Mandaeans refer to themselves as Nazorean

 * dispute on divinity and the existance of other messiah's
 * first century messiahs and prophets never claimed they were divine
 * Josephus is not acceptable to cite
 * some first century messiahs and prophets claimed they were divine
 * Jesus did not claim he was divine
 * Josephus is acceptable to cite
 * Jesus did claim he was divine
 * Josephus states that the persons supposedly "messiah"s were actually thought to be prophets
 * the Jews had considerable law on false prophets
 * Josephus supports the idea that there were people claiming to be and thought to be "messiah"s

 * dispute over reaction of the jews to "other messiahs"
 * Sabbattai Lev (circa 1400) shows how Jews found "other messiahs" troublesome and offensive
 * Shabbatai Lev (circa 1600) does not shows how Jews found "other messiahs" troublesome and offensive
 * There is no evidence from the 1st century that Jews found non-mainstream beliefs troublesome
 * There is no evidence from the 1st century
 * According to historic record, as a group, Jews at the time were conservative
 * According to historic record, as a group, Jews at the time were sceptical of radical new interpretations
 * According to historic record, as a group, Jews at the time were disinterested in afterlife/salvation stories
 * According to historic record, as a group, Jews at the time were making many original claims
 * There was no "mainstream"
 * It is necessary to understand the Macabees to comprehend how Jews react to other Messiahs

Miscellaneous contemporarial details

 * dispute over the nature of the law
 * Jewish religious law was the main law of the land
 * Jewish religious law was mostly lenient
 * Jewish religious law was mostly legislative

 * dispute over significance of Jesus conversing in the Temple on the law
 * It was fairly standard that young people were able to converse on the law in the Temple
 * The evidence that young people would be expected to be able to converse on the law is rubbish
 * Jesus was remarkably unusual in being able to converse on the law in the Temple
 * The evidence that young people would be expected to be able to converse on the law is 100 years after Jesus

 * dispute over general demography of Jews at the time
 * "X% lived in towns, Y% in villages" is too demographic
 * most Jews at the time were hard working
 * in the circumstances of the age, there are not many "slackers" in village life
 * most Jews at the time were God fearing
 * there is no evidence that most Jews were hard working
 * there is no evidence that most Jews were God fearing
 * most Jews at the time were in villages
 * village people are less likely to be hellenised than city people

Development of later religion

 * This article should describe who followed the Pharisees (4 votes against 1, 1 abstention)
 * "Later forms of Judaism" followed the Pharisees rather than "Rabbinic Judaism" (1st vote-unresolved) (2nd vote - 3 votes against 1)

 * Discussion of the subsequent development of Christianity and how it connected to the gentiles belongs elsewhere not here (4 votes against 1 (+1 for a brief mention))

 * FT2s version of the paragraph discussing how christianity emerged is preferred (general consensus)
 * Originally the intent was to preach to the Jews. Some but not all requirements were removed, as it was felt that the new emphasis was on faith and not detailed laws. Thus there were 'Jewish Christians', Jews who believed in Christ Messiah. When the Jews as a community rejected this, the Christian message was taken to the gentiles instead. To make it palatable, and draw a line separating them from the Jews (who were by now becoming politically dangerous associates) many more of the restrictive laws were removed and the emphasis was shifted. The message that reached the gentiles was therefore a more universal one, in the sense that it was easier to digest, its appeal was more emotional than legalistic, and it did not contain many of the practices beliefs and rituals by which the Jews kept themselves separate from others.

 * Anything later than bar Kochba is irrelevant
 * Is it important that the manner in which christianity emerged indicates the historiography of the Gospels

The non-Jewishness of Christianity

 * dispute over the reaction of Rome to Jews and vice versa
 * The Jewish revolt was about seeking political and religious freedom vs. Romans.
 * The Jewish revolt was about poverty in the peasentry vs. the elite.
 * Jews at the time were under intense pressure from Rome
 * The Macabbee revolt indicates that Jews violently do not like their sense of identity threatened
 * As a group, Jews at the time tended to polarise under pressure.
 * even after Bar Kochba, Romans treated Jews better than Christians.
 * As a group, Jews at the time tended to be protective of their national identity
 * The ideas of how Romans treated early Christians is predominantly later Christian propaganda

 * dispute over reasons for christianity's non-jewishness
 * The jews were becoming politically dangerous due to rebellion against Rome
 * Christians deliberately shifted away from Jewish law to make themselves disassociated with the Jews
 * Christianity is easier to digest
 * Christianity being easier to digest is POV

 * dispute over importance of restrictiveness of some Jewish practises
 * Judaism's restrictive practices prevented non-Jews from converting to it or similar religion
 * Jews never believed non-Jews should obey Jewish law
 * Many non-Jews turned to religions with restrictive practices
 * it is logical that dropping more Jewish traditions made Christian beliefs more palatable
 * it is not logical that dropping more Jewish traditions should make Christian beliefs more palatable
 * Replacing halakhah by pure faith instantly made Christianity more acceptable to non-Jews
 * a teacher observing halakhah does not mean students will reject lessons in algebra
 * a train going at 100 mph does not mean that the driver had sausages for breakfast

 * dispute over reasons for early christianity to be amongst the gentiles
 * Early Christians failed to convince the Jews thus tried elsewhere
 * Early Christians were never part of Judaism
 * Early Christians failed to convince the Jews thus felt rejected
 * The Ebionites are those whose Christianity descended from the apostles themselves in person
 * The Ebionites are a strange Jewish sect, happening to be in Jerusalem, who misinterpreted Christianity
 * The Ebionites are not similar to early Christians, but very similar to Jews

 * dispute over early christians and orthodoxy
 * The early Christians were often at odds with groups they considered heretical
 * Historians think there was no disputation
 * Historians think there was no orthodoxy
 * Historians think the situation was "Iranaeus and Co." vs. "Anyone who disagreed with Iranaeus and Co."

Consensus and inconsensuality

 * early discussions
 * Early discussions focused on achieving consensus, and included voting
 * A visible solution was reached on most of the issues
 * A version for discussion was drafted at a user talk page
 * Discussions were had
 * Submissions were made with regard to compromise
 * The article was unlocked
 * A draft of the changes was made on the article
 * A request for 48 hours non-editing to discuss the article was made
 * Most users respected the request

 * reversion war
 * User Y violated the request, rewriting the article substantially
 * User Y's version predominantly went against the consensus and the voting
 * User Z reverted user Y's version to the version about which a 48 hour non-edit was requested
 * User Y reverted it back to their version
 * User Z insisted on the concensus version being restored
 * User Y reverted it back
 * User Z reverted it once more
 * User Y's associates reverted it to User Y's version
 * User Z restored the discussion version
 * The revert war continued
 * The article was locked in the User Y state.

 * disputed behaviour
 * it is acceptable to make some changes
 * it is unacceptable to make large changes for this article in that state
 * it is fundamentally important to ask for a pause in editing to prevent edit wars
 * it is acceptable to make major changes to the article when it is so contested
 * Slrubenstein has the right to revert from FT2s version although the opposite is not true
 * if a page is not protected, editors have a right to work on it
 * the way forward is discussion on talk pages
 * it is inappropriate to ask for a pause in editing for the purpose of discussion
 * respect and decency demand that though one has rights, one should sometimes abstain from them
 * Saying one editor can revert, but the other editor cannot, is hypocrisy

 * the resulting 2 versions
 * The people User X invited to this page all support his version
 * 3 users (none of whom invited the other) do not support User X's version
 * The value of a split depends on the nature of the articles
 * User X sarcastically suggests splitting the article
 * Splitting the versions into two articles will solve this problem
 * User X's version is NPOV
 * User X refuses not to edit both articles to how they think it should be
 * User X admits User X will never tolerate the other version
 * User X's version is POV not NPOV
 * The not-User-X version is complicated
 * The not-User-X version complies more than satisfies journalistic standards for readability
 * User X's version is appallingly unreadable
 * User X's version is exquisite

Issues with users on this talk page

 * "Packing the house" occurred between the sets of voting
 * It is a more important fact that Gerrymandering is unethical
 * It is a more important fact that Gerrymandering is currently allowed

 * Mediation was formally requested
 * It became apparant that Slrubenstein, Amgine, and CheeseDreams should formally request mediation between them (which has is now occurring)

 * FT2 as a mediator
 * At an early stage FT2 arrived and behaved in the manner of a mediator
 * Slrubenstein disputes that FT2 was ever treated as a mediator
 * Slrubenstein and JDG think that FT2 is agenda driven
 * Wesley, Amgine, CheeseDreams, think that FT2 is fair

 * Worth of scholarship
 * The lack of academic qualification does not mean one is unable to speak truth
 * Academic qualification does not mean one is always right
 * Amgine has secured access to ATLA.

User X thinks User X's opponents
 * Have done little or no research
 * Are mistaken and ignorant about many things
 * Write text riddled with the most ignorant of errors
 * Add material that has no basis in fact
 * Rely on votes about substance which is inappropriate
 * Do not rely on the historical record, unlike User X
 * Make things up
 * Use speculative arguments
 * Are ignorant of history
 * Have specious reasoning
 * Use inappropriate sources such as Google
 * Has innacurate and ignorant research unlike User X
 * Have no business working on this article as they do not trust User X's argument

User X's opponents think that User X(not all views held by all opponents)
 * Is committing hypocrisy
 * Has double standards - one for themselves, the other for opponents
 * Is unwilling to listen to criticism resulting from votes
 * Ignores valid arguments resorting to Ad Hominem such as "you are ignorant of history" and "your reasoning is specious and ignorant" and "that seems speculative" rather than producing a proper argument.
 * Thinks his view is fundamentally correct, and refuses to consider the possibility of inaccuracy
 * Resorts to criticising sources when they produce citable evidence against his case in an attempt to dismiss it
 * Have suspect accuracy of research based on User X's claim that "most historians do not think Hinduism existed before the 18th century"
 * Has admitted to only using 5/6 sources

 * Mud-slinging occurred

User X and User X's supporters stated to some of the people they see as opposed to them that
 * They are not acting in good faith
 * They are nuts
 * They are masturbating User X
 * They use silly argument
 * They are ignorant
 * They are all partisan and resent criticism
 * Their reasoning is specious and ignorant.
 * They are incompetent at using Wikipedia talk pages properly
 * Their stance is unreasonable
 * Their stance is obstructing User X
 * They are unscholarly and fringe (unlike User X)
 * Their reasoning is smelly poor quality fish
 * They are racist
 * They are rude
 * They start revert wars
 * They are gay atheists
 * They should be banned

Those who were not User X or User X's supporters stated of User X and of some of User X's supporters that
 * Some people think User X is not acting in good faith
 * User X is disrespectful
 * User X is uncivil
 * User X uses personal attacks
 * User X is a hypocrit
 * User X has no interest in consensus
 * User X is vain and arrogant
 * User X's case is so weak that he feels the need to round up supporters from elsewhere in order to win discussions
 * Some of User X's supporters threatened a revert war
 * Some of User X's supporters were referred to as Darling
 * Some of User X's supporters are neither neutral nor reasonable
 * Some of User X's supporters are crassly aggressive
 * Some of User X's supporters stated they would ignore the result of this discussion and revert the article to User X's version

Dispute of summary
CheeseDream's version of the disputed area of the summary
 * (1) -

??????'s version of the disputed area of the summary
 * (1) -

Original text (as per archive 6) of the disputed area of the summary
 * (1) -


text:
Baylisascaris

Baylisascaris is a genus of roundworms that infect more than fifty animal species.

Life cycle
Baylisascaris eggs are passed in feces and become active within a month. They can remain viable in the environment for years, withstanding heat and cold. Animals become infested either by swallowing the eggs or eating another animal infested with Baylisascaris.

Disease progression
After an animal swallows the eggs, the microscopic larvae hatch in the intestine and invade the intestinal wall. If they are in their definitive host they develop for several weeks, then enter the intestinal lumen, mature, mate, and produce eggs, which are carried out in the fecal stream. If the larvae are in a paratenic host, they break into the bloodstream and enter various organs, particularly the central nervous system. A great deal of damage occurs wherever the larva try to make a home. In response to the attack, the body attempts to destroy it by walling it off or killing it. The larva moves rapidly to escape, seeking out the liver, eyes, spinal cord or brain. Occasionally they can be found in the heart, lungs, and other organs. Eventually the larva dies and is reabsorbed by the body. In very small species such as mice, it might take only one or two larvae in the brain to be fatal. If the larva does not cause significant damage in vital organs, then the victim will show no signs of disease. On the other hand, if it causes behavioral changes by destroying parts of the brain, the host becomes easier prey, bringing the larva into the intestine of a new host.

Clinical signs in humans
Are the following:
 * Skin irritations from larvae migrating within the skin.
 * Respiratory discomfort, liver enlargement, and fever due to reaction to larvae migration.
 * Eye and brain tissue damage due to the random migration of the larvae.
 * Nausea, a lethargic feeling, incoordination and loss of eyesight.
 * Severe neurological signs including imbalance, circling and abnormal behavior, caused by extensive tissue damage due to larval migration through the brain, eventually seizures and coma.

Treatment
While deworming can rid the intestine of adult Baylisascaris, no treatment has been shown to alleviate illness caused by migrating larvae. Despite lack of larvicidal effects, albendazole (20–40 mg/kg/d for 1–4 weeks) has been used to treat many cases.

Baylisascaris species
Each Baylisascaris species has a host species that it uses to reproduce. The eggs appear in the host species' feces. They can then be ingested by, and infest, a variety of other animals (including humans) that serve as paratenic hosts.

Baylisascaris species include:
 * Baylisascaris procyonis (of raccoons)
 * Baylisascaris melis (of European badgers)
 * Baylisascaris transfuga (of bears)
 * Baylisascaris columnaris (of skunks and American badgers)
 * Baylisascaris devosi (of fishers and martens)
 * Baylisascaris laevis (of marmots)
 * Baylisascaris schroederi (of giant pandas)
 * Baylisascaris potosis (of kinkajous)

Baylisascaris procyonis
Baylisascaris procyonis is found in the intestines of raccoons in North America, Japan and Germany. It infests 68 to 82% of some raccoon populations, according to the House Rabbit Society. According to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, nearly 100 percent of raccoons in the Midwestern US are infected. This parasite can be extremely harmful or deadly to humans.

Baylisascaris columnaris
Skunks carry Baylisascaris columnaris, a similar species to B. procyonis. Many pet skunks have died from this parasite. According to several skunk experts, many baby skunks from skunk farms have B. columnaris present in their bodies. The exact proportion of skunks that are infested is unknown. Since the worms are often at too early a stage in development to begin shedding eggs into the feces, a fecal test may not detect the parasite, and the pet should be pre-emptively treated with dewormers antiparasitacides.

Baylisascaris eggs are highly resistant to decontamination procedures because of their dense shell and sticky surface. They can survive hot or freezing weather and certain chemicals, remaining viable for several years. Bleach can prevent the eggs from sticking, but will not ensure destruction. According to Parasitism in Companion Animals by Olympic Veterinary Hospital, hand washing is an important countermeasure against ingestion, and decontamination of other surfaces is accomplished by thoroughly flaming with a propane torch or treating with lye. Other forms of high heat such as boiling water or steam will accomplish the same result. Children are more likely to be infected than adults because of their tendency towards pica, particularly geophagy. In spite of the numerous raccoons living in close contact with humans, less than 30 serious infections of humans by Baylisascaris had been reported by 2012; but it is thought that some cases are misdiagnosed as other infections or are never identified.

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

title: Baylisascaris


text:
Scott Nein

Scott R. Nein of Middletown, Ohio, (April 13, 1951 - August 19, 2023) was an American politician of the Republican party, who formerly served in the Ohio General Assembly.

Political career
Nein was encouraged by John Boehner to run for the Ohio House of Representatives to succeed him in 1990. He did so and won the seat. He won reelection in 1992 and 1994. By his third term Nein was serving as majority floor leader of the House.

When Senator Barry Levey resigned from the Ohio Senate in 1995, Nein was appointed to replace him. He resigned his seat in the House and took the seat in the Senate in the same day. He went on to win election to the seat in 1996 for a full term. He again won election in 2000.

Post-political career
Following his time in elected office, Nein was made CEO of the Ohio Association of Insurance Agents/Independent Insurance Agents of Ohio, where he is serving today.

title: Scott Nein


text: User:ThinkPink

title: User:ThinkPink


text:
ARO

ARO (short for Auto Romania) was a Romanian off-road vehicle manufacturer located in Câmpulung. The first ARO vehicles were produced in 1957, and the last in 2003. For a short while, Daihatsu-powered AROs were sold in Spain and produced in Portugal under the brands. In Italy, AROs were produced and sold under the ACM brand, often fitted with Volkswagen engines.

Low volume production of ARO vehicles has restarted under the aegis of a Czech company called Auto Max Czech (AMC). During the mid-2000s, Russian manufacturer Derways used ARO chassis to produce its Derways Cowboy model.

History

The first factory in Câmpulung was built during the Second World War, under orders from Marshal Ion Antonescu, starting 1942. The facility was initially meant to produce airscrews, being an extension of the Romanian aircraft manufacturer IAR. After the war, this factory formed the base for ARO.

The beginning
ARO manufactured over 380,000 vehicles, 2/3 of which were exported to some 110 countries on five continents (before 1989 about 90% of the ARO production was exported). AROs were also produced in Brazil, Italy, and Portugal (Portaro) often under another brandname. ARO vehicles were also produced for Spain and marketed under the name Hisparo managed by the company Enasa.

Production started in 1957 with the IMS-57, which was the first model of the IMS Series, produced under a GAZ-69 license. In 1959 the IMS-57 model was replaced by the M59, followed by a new model in 1964 called the M461. Though its styling and design were based on its predecessors, the M461 had clearly distinguishable features also boasting fit and finish improvements fitted with redesigned mechanicals.

In 1972 ARO successfully launched a ground-up redesign as their new family of models, the 24 Series which eventually included many models and configurations. The ARO 24 Series got a "little brother" in 1980, the 10 Series, also produced in many body trims with different engines and in both 4x2 and 4x4 variants. ARO engines and other technology was also utilized in T.V. light commercial vehicles.

Armored variant
The ABI (Autovehicul Blindat pentru Intervenție) armored car was built on the ARO chassis, using an ARO engine. Seventeen such vehicles were produced in 1979 and were used for internal security duties. Their armor ranged from 4 to 10 mm and they were equipped with a turret that housed a 7.62 mm PK machine gun, or a 12.7 mm DShK heavy machine gun mounted on top. Top speed was 100 km/h. In 1986, 5 were delivered to Liberia and in 1987 10 were delivered to Algeria. Export variant was called AM 100. The remaining 2 were destroyed during the Romanian Revolution and now their wrecks can be seen at the National Military Museum, in Bucharest.

Privatization
In 1998 a Cuban-born American businessman, John Perez, offered franchise agreements to US auto dealers. Some 200 dealers paid $75,000 each for franchise rights, for a total of $15 million. These rights were offered by a company called East European Imports. The ARO was offered as a Warsaw Pact surplus military vehicle. After the franchises were sold, dealers were pressured to send cashier's checks or wire transfers to start receiving vehicles that were allegedly being held in a port in Florida. Dealers refused and insisted to pay upon delivery which eventually led to East European Imports closing its doors.

In September 2003 the Romanian state sold 68.7% of ARO to Cross Lander, a company owned by John Perez, for $180,000 US. The contract stipulated that the company had to invest $2 million US, which allegedly never took place. Instead, all of ARO's production tooling and equipment were sold off; this was an action which violated the privatization contract. The Romanian state sued John Perez in 2006 for falsifying documents in order to acquire the company.

It was planned to enter the US market with the ARO 244 as the Cross Lander 244X, but funding ran out in February 2006. The company Cross Lander USA Inc fired all its employees, sold its headquarters and closed down in February 2006.

ARO went into bankruptcy in June 2006.

Amrom
The company Amrom Automotive 2006 was negotiating with ARO creditors to purchase the company from bankruptcy, and plans to resume production of the ARO line of vehicles under the ARO name at the Câmpulung factory.

Models

 * IMS Series (1957–1975)
 * ARO 24 Series (1972–2003)
 * ARO 10 Series (1980–2003)

title: ARO


text:
Talk:Baylisascaris

I'm not quite sure why that section about the possibility of these worms being used in a biological terror attack, it seems a little disconcerting to have this on the internet for no apparent reason, I'm probably just paranoid but still.......
 * FWIW, they cannot be bred in a pertri dish. 213.196.204.162 (talk) 23:31, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Deadly or not?
The raccoon article's Diseases section claims that Baylisascaris procyonis is fairly harmless. This article claims that it is often deadly. The CDC doesn't really agree with the "often deadly" claim, but neither does it support a "mostly harmless" claim. (Five out of 25 known cases since 2003 have been fatal. A 20% death rate is neither "seldom" nor "common", IMO.)

More reading:

 * Michigan DNR article on Baylisascaris procyonis
 * Emerging Infectious Diseases article claiming four fatalities out of 11 known cases since 1984
 * Pet Education article that seems intent on scaring people

Someone ought to give all of the above a good read, then thoroughly re-work the section.75.5.231.169 (talk) 20:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Video of infected animal
If anyone interested, check out this. This is supposedly "drunk squirrel", but in reality it is probably a victim of Baylisascaris spp. Cite of vet: "I found it pretty sad; I think the people thought it was drunk but it looks exactly like a parasite in the brain we see all the time in the squirrels called Baylisascaris spp. — raccoon roundworm; permanent brain damage, causes severe balance issues, automatic euthansia. The circling in one direction and loss of balance is classic. Poor guy; hope some put him out of his misery." Of course this is original research but maybe anyone have confirmed video of infected animal? This IMHO would add value to article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.77.220.122 (talk) 10:41, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 one external links on Baylisascaris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040903015720/http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu:80/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm to http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205003054/http://www.hrschicago.org:80/rabbitfr.html to http://www.hrschicago.org/rabbitfr.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040903015720/http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu:80/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm to http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060220071721/http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~royerc/interest.htm to http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~royerc/interest.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041205003054/http://www.hrschicago.org:80/rabbitfr.html to http://www.hrschicago.org/rabbitfr.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040903015720/http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu:80/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm to http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041216112511/http://www.unbc.ca:80/nlui/wildlife_diseases_bc/baylisascaris.htm to http://www.unbc.ca/nlui/wildlife_diseases_bc/baylisascaris.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:29, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Baylisascaris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060220071721/http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~royerc/interest.htm to http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~royerc/interest.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hrschicago.org/rabbitfr.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/nemaplex/Taxadata/Baylisascarisprocyonis.htm
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.unbc.ca/nlui/wildlife_diseases_bc/baylisascaris.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:59, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Baylisascaris


text:
Gary Cates

Gary Cates (born December 27, 1955) is a Republican politician who served in the Ohio General Assembly. He was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives from 1995 to 2004, and a member of the Ohio Senate from 2005 to 2011.

Life and career
A graduate of Virginia Tech and the University of Dayton, Cates began his political career as a Union Township Trustee from 1990 to 1995. When Representative Scott Nein resigned from the Ohio House of Representatives to take a seat in the Ohio Senate late in 1995, Cates was appointed to fill the remainder of his term.

A reliably Republican district, Cates faced no opposition in the 1996 primary and beat Kendall L. Mays handily in the 1996 election. He went on to win easily against opponents in 1998 and 2000, and ran unopposed in 2002. In 2001, Cates was elected by his peers to serve in as Speaker Pro Tempore of the House, the second highest position under Speaker of the House Larry Householder. He served in this capacity for both the 124th General Assembly and the 125th General Assembly.

Ohio Senate
With incumbent Senator Scott Nein unable to run for the Senate again because of term limits, Cates, along with Representative Greg Jolivette and County Commissioner Courtney Combs were seen as potential successors. Midway through 2003, the Butler County Republican party sought to create a proposal that would help to avoid a primary. It focused on Jolivette and Combs switching offices, therefore allowing Cates to seal the nomination for the Senate seat. However, this did not work out. Jolivette decided to seek a fourth term in the House, and Combs decided to seek the Senate seat. Cates faced no opposition for his bid. Therefore, he had a clear path to the Senate in a staunchly Republican district. Against Democrat Melvin A. Smith in the general election, Cates won by about 48,000 votes.

Cates, up for reelection in 2008, was again a strong favorite against Democratic challenger Kathryn Bridgman. He won a second term by approximately 35,000 votes.

On May 5, 2011, Ohio Governor John Kasich announced that he would be appointing Cates as the senior vice chancellor for the division of Innovation and Enterprise Development with the Ohio Board of Regents. Cates accepted, and on May 23, 2011, resigned from the Senate. He was succeeded by Bill Coley, who will serve out the remainder of Cates' term before running for a full term in 2012.

title: Gary Cates


text:
Red Flag Publishing House

Red Flag Publishing House or Hongqi Press (红旗出版社) is a book publisher based in China. It is a subsidiary company of Zhejiang Daily Press Group. Established in 1981, it is originally belonged to Qiushi Magazine and named after its predecessor Red Flag magazine, before its reconstruction in 2010. It mainly dedicated to political & economic publication, especially dealing with the construction and the political theories of Chinese Communist Party.

title: Red Flag Publishing House


text:
Talk:United Kingdom coalition government (1852–1855)

Government of what country?

Shouldn't this go under that country's heading?
 * I think it's fairly obvious, but I've put the article in the "British ministries" category. Donald, 20.23 22nd Dec. 2004

Proposed merge
This should remain distinct from Aberdeen Ministry. That article is a place to discuss the government itself; this is more of a list. Mackensen (talk) 15:17, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: all moved Kotniski (talk) 11:04, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Coalition Government 1852–1855 → United Kingdom coalition government (1852–1855) — Please see here. The purpose of this move request is to standardise these articles, and give them more specific and less UK-centric.  City   of   Destruction  22:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)  City   of   Destruction  22:28, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Coalition government 1915–1916 → United Kingdom coalition government (1915–1916)
 * Coalition Government 1916–1922 → United Kingdom coalition government (1916–1922)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


text:
Francesco Francia

Francesco Francia, whose real name was Francesco Raibolini (1447 – 5 January 1517) was an Italian painter, goldsmith, and medallist from Bologna, who was also director of the city mint.

He may have trained with Marco Zoppo and was first mentioned as a painter in 1486. His earliest known work is the Felicini Madonna, which is signed and dated 1494. He worked in partnership with Lorenzo Costa, and was influenced by Ercole de' Roberti's and Costa's style. After 1505 he was influenced more by Perugino and Raphael. He had a large workshop and trained Marcantonio Raimondi, Ludovico Marmitta, and several other artists; he produced niellos, in which Raimondi first learnt to engrave, soon excelling his master, according to Vasari. Raphael's Santa Cecilia is supposed to have produced such a feeling of inferiority in Francia that it caused him to die of depression. However, as his friendship with Raphael is now well-known, this story has been discredited.

He died in Bologna. His sons Giacomo Francia and Giulio Francia were also artists.

Until 1500

 * Crucifixion with St. John and St. Jerome, c. 1485, 52 cm x 33 cm, oil on wood, Palazzo d'Accursio, Bologna
 * The Holy Family, c. 1485, 54 cm x 40 cm, oil on wood, Gemäldegalerie, Berlin
 * The Virgin and Child with an Angel, c. 1490, 58 cm x 44 cm, oil on wood, Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh
 * Bartolomeo Bianchini, c. 1485–1500, 57 cm x 41 cm, oil on wood, National Gallery, London
 * Baptism of Jesus, c. 1490, 29 cm x 55 cm, oil on wood, Calouste Gulbenkian Museum, Lisbon
 * Madonna and Child with two Angels, c. 1495, 64 cm x 49 cm, oil on wood, Alte Pinakothek, Munich
 * Pala Calcina, 1500, 193 cm x 151 cm, tempera and oil on canvas (formerly wood), Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg

Years 1500-10

 * Madonna and Child, c. 1500, 67 cm x 52 cm, oil on wood, Wallington National Trust, Northumberland
 * Madonna and Child with Saints Francis and Jerome, 1500–10, 75 cm x 57 cm, tempera on wood, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
 * The Annunciation with St. Albert the Carmelite, c. 1503–04, 182 cm x 132 cm, oil on canvas (formerly wood), Musée Condé, Chantilly
 * Adoration of the Child, 1500–05, 175 cm x 132 cm, oil on wood, Alte Pinakothek, Munich
 * Evangelista Scappi, 1500–05, 55 cm x 44 cm, oil on wood, Uffizi, Florence
 * Bishop Altobello Averoldo, c. 1505, 54 cm x 41 cm, oil on wood, National Gallery of Art, Washington
 * Crucifixion, c. 1505, 246 cm x 146 cm, oil on wood, San Giacomo Maggiore, Bologna
 * The life of Saint Cecilia and her husband Valerian - scene 1 (The Marriage) & 10 (The Burial), 1504–1506, 360 cm x 290 cm, frescoes, Oratorio di Santa Cecilia, Bologna
 * Venus and Cupid, 1505–10, 80 cm x 49 cm, oil on wood, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Mulhouse
 * Baptism of Jesus, 1509, 209 cm x 169 cm, oil on wood, Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden

After 1510

 * The Holy Family, c. 1510, 64 cm x 49 cm, oil on wood, Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest
 * Federico Gonzaga (son of Isabella d'Este), 1510, 45 cm x 34 cm, oil on wood transferred to canvas and finally again on wood, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
 * Portrait likely Isabella d'Este, 1511, 44 cm x 35 cm, oil on wood, Vienna
 * Pala Buonvisi, 1510–12, 195 cm x 180 cm, oil on wood, National Gallery, London
 * Presentation of Jesus in the temple, 1510–13, 201 cm x 145 cm, oil on wood, Pinacoteca Comunale di Cesena, Italy
 * Virgin and the Child and the Infant St. John the Baptist, 1510–15, 65 cm x 51 cm, oil on wood, São Paulo Museum of Art
 * Virgin and the Child and the Infant St. John the Baptist (Francesco Francia and sons), c. 1515, 115 cm x 94 cm, oil on wood, National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne

title: Francesco Francia


text:
Roque Júnior

José Vítor Roque Júnior (born 31 August 1976), more commonly known as Roque Júnior, is a Brazilian football pundit and former player who played as a defender.

He won 48 caps for Brazil and was part of the winning squad at the 2002 World Cup. He is one of five players that have won the Copa Libertadores, the Champions League and the World Cup; the others are Ronaldinho, Cafu, Dida and Julián Álvarez.

Club career
Roque Júnior was born in Santa Rita do Sapucaí. During his career, he played for Santarritense, São José, Palmeiras, AC Milan, Leeds United, Siena, Bayer Leverkusen, MSV Duisburg and Qatari side Al-Rayyan. He is an iconic footballer for Palmeiras, as he played more than 200 competitive games for them. His greatest success in club football came playing for Palmeiras, with whom he won the 1999 Copa Libertadores and with A.C. Milan winning the 2002–03 UEFA Champions League. In the Champions League final he heroically played most of the extra-time carrying a severe injury.

There was excitement at Elland Road when Peter Reid brought Roque to Leeds on loan, but it was short lived as the team conceded 25 times in his seven appearances, failing to win and suffering six defeats with Roque being sent off on his home debut against Birmingham City. However, he did score two goals in a League Cup game against Manchester United (Leeds lost 3–2) but his spell at Leeds was not considered a success.

In September 2008, Palmeiras have signed him from Al-Rayyan on loan until the end of the season.

After leaving Palmeiras in November 2008, he was offered to Australian A-League clubs in April and was in talks with Avaí gaffer Paulo Silas in July, but nothing materialised out of it. In February 2010, Ituano signed the former Brazil international, who had last played in 2008 for Palmeiras.

International career
Roque Júnior was successful on the international stage for Brazil, having played 48 games (two of them unofficial) and scored two goals, and also captaining them on a number of occasions. He was a starter in the 2002 FIFA World Cup winning campaign, forming the back line with Lúcio and Edmílson. He was later called up for the 2005 FIFA Confederations Cup, but did not make it into the squad for the 2006 FIFA World Cup due to injury. He made his last international appearance in 2005 and announced his retirement on 4 September 2007.

Personal life
Roque Júnior is devoted to helping São José Esporte Clube's youth players with a project called "Projeto Primeira Camisa" ("Project First Jersey").

Roque Júnior was the most popular host of Total Request Live on Brazil MTV (BMTV) during his 10-year stint (2005–2015).

Management and coaching
In 2015, Roque Júnior took his first managerial role at XV de Piracicaba.

International

 * Scores and results list Brazil's goal tally first, score column indicates score after each Roque Júnior goal.

Honours
Palmeiras
 * Campeonato Paulista: 1996, 2008
 * Copa do Brasil: 1998
 * Copa Mercosur: 1998
 * Copa Libertadores: 1999
 * Torneio Rio – São Paulo: 2000
 * Intercontinental Cup runner-up: 1999

Milan Brazil
 * UEFA Champions League: 2002–03
 * Coppa Italia: 2002–03
 * FIFA World Cup: 2002
 * FIFA Confederations Cup: 2005

title: Roque Júnior


text:
User:BrandonYusufToropov

 "We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men." — George Orwell

Today's WP:RESTATEMENT OF THE OBVIOUS is brought to you by The International Euphemism Institute. Nasty-twentieth-century-political-philosophy-guilt-by-association update: The article about the recently-coined political epithet Israeli apartheid became Israel and the apartheid analogy because .... mumble mumble mumble. The article about the recently-coined political epithet Islamofascism, however, must remain under the title Islamofascism because ... well, these matters are controversial, and discussion of them is best left to the experts.

Here's my day job. Here's my total edit count, now approaching 7,000.

You may (or may not) be interested in how I came to Islam. If you want to discuss religious matters politely, I am open to doing so on my talk page. If, however, you believe that politeness is not appropriate, you may find that your message has been deleted without comment. Apologies in advance for that.

"Hey, does User:BrandonYusufToropov reserve the right to delete, without explanation, material on his talk page that he, in his sole, exclusive, and perhaps even arbitrary judgment determines to be disrespectful or inappropriate?"

If you think I promote or sanction religious prejudice in any form, don't keep it to yourself. I would really like to know what makes you think that. Please leave a polite message on my talk page.

By the way, Holocaust denial is something that proceeds from the south end of a northbound bull.

title: User:BrandonYusufToropov


text:
User:Jplatt39

Jplatt39 is a middle-aged postmodern slacker who currently lives in Rhode Island. His interests include, but aren't limited to, science fiction and fantasy, comic books, literature and fine art. He began contributing because he was upset by how many fringe science fiction and fantasy figures were being discussed solely in terms of their contributions to the genre, when people like Philip Wylie, Leo and Diane Dillon and Alfred Coppel were famous for so much more. He does not believe in objectivity, and contributes reluctantly because he is not comfortable with what is considered a reasonable style. Please help him out by taking an aggressive approach to revising his articles.

title: User:Jplatt39


text:
David Don

David Don (21 December 1799 – 15 December 1841) was a Scottish botanist.

Biography
David Don was born on 21 December 1799 at Doo Hillock, Forfar, Angus, Scotland to Caroline Clementina Stuart, and her husband George Don of Forfar. His older brother was George Don, also a botanist. His father was a curator at the Royal Botanic Garden, Leith Walk, Edinburgh. Don was Professor of Botany at King's College London from 1836 to 1841, and librarian at the Linnean Society of London from 1822 to 1841.

He described several of the major conifers discovered in the period, including first descriptions of coast redwood (Taxodium sempervirens D. Don; now Sequoia sempervirens (D. Don) Endl.), Bristlecone Fir (Pinus bracteata D. Don, now Abies bracteata (D. Don) A. Poit.), Grand Fir (Pinus grandis Douglas ex D. Don; now Abies grandis (Douglas ex D. Don) Lindl.) and Coulter Pine (Pinus coulteri D. Don), and was the first to treat Sugi (Cupressus japonica Thunb.; now Cryptomeria japonica (Thunb.) D. Don) in a new genus.

He also named the orchid genus Pleione in 1825.

Don was librarian to the botanist Aylmer Bourke Lambert and compiled for him, Prodromus florae nepalensis ... London, J. Gale, 1825, based on collections made by the botanists Francis Hamilton and Nathaniel Wallich of the Calcutta Botanic Garden.

On 15 April 1837 in Soho he married Mary Evans (1788/9–1864). He died on 8 December 1841 from cancer, and is buried at Kensal Green.

In 1938, the London County Council marked Don at 32 Soho Square with a rectangular stone plaque, commemorating him as well as botanists Joseph Banks and Robert Brown and meetings of the Linnean Society.

List of selected publications

 * Theophrastaceae

title: David Don


text:
User:BrandonYusufToropov/Jihad

This is the placeholder for proposed revisions to the article on Jihad.

title: User:BrandonYusufToropov/Jihad


text:
Recognition of same-sex unions in Poland

Poland does not legally recognize same-sex unions, either in the form of marriage or civil unions. In 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex couples have limited legal rights in regards to the tenancy of a shared household. A few laws also guarantee certain limited rights for unmarried couples, including couples of the same sex. Same-sex spouses also have access to residency rights under EU law.

Article 18 of the Polish Constitution, adopted in 1997, was frequently interpreted as banning same-sex marriage,    but the latest (2019) court ruling states that it does not preclude their recognition. In November 2023, a Polish same-sex couple who married in Germany requested Poland's top court to overturn the nation's ban on same-sex marriage.

Unregistered cohabitation
While Poland does not have a specific law on cohabitation, there are some provisions in various legal acts or Supreme Court rulings that recognise relations between unmarried partners and grant them specific rights and obligations. For example, Article 115(11) of the Penal Code (Kodeks karny) uses the term "the closest person", which covers romantic relations that are not legally formalised. The status of "the closest person" gives the right of refusal to testify against the partner. The term "partner" is not explicitly defined. A March 2016 landmark decision of the Supreme Court regarding same-sex partners' rights confirmed that the wording also includes same-sex partners.

Other laws also provide limited recognition for same-sex couples. For instance, since 2004, when one partner is entitled to social benefits, the income of the other partner is also taken into consideration. Under Article 6.14 of the Social Aid Act of 12 March 2004 (Ustawa z dnia 12 marca 2004 r. o pomocy społecznej), entitlement to social benefits is dependent on the income per person in a family. The term "family" is used in the act to refer to people who are married, in a de facto partnership, living together and have a common household. Since 2008, if one partner suffers an accident or is seriously ill, the other partner is considered as a next of kin for medical purposes. Under Article 3.1(2) of the Patients' Rights Act of 6 November 2008 (Ustawa z dnia 6 listopada 2008 r. o prawach pacjenta i Rzeczniku Praw Pacjenta), the definition of "next of kin" (osoba bliska) includes a "person in a durable partnership" (osoba w trwałym pożyciu).

A resolution of the Supreme Court from 28 November 2012 (III CZP 65/12) on the interpretation of the term "a person who has lived actually in cohabitation with the tenant" was issued with regard to the case of a gay man who was the partner of a deceased person, the main tenant of the apartment. The Court interpreted the law in a way that recognised the surviving partner as authorised to take over the right to tenancy. The Court stated that the person actually remaining in cohabitation with the tenant - in the meaning of Article 691 § 1 of the Civil Code - is a person connected with the tenant by a bond of emotional, physical and economic nature. This also includes a person of the same sex. Previously, in March 2010, the European Court of Human Rights ruled, in the case of Kozak v. Poland, that LGBT people have the right to inherit from their partners.

In one case in 2011, a Polish writer, Izabela Filipiak, managed to get a residency card for her American partner.

In 2018, a lesbian couple was granted the right to register their British-born son as their own.

Historian Kamil Karczewski has unearthed evidence of what may be the earliest documented instance of a same-sex partnership resembling marital union in the legal history of Poland. The partnership involved Marian Kuleszyński and Stefan Góralski, both residents of the Suwałki region in the early 1920s. While the relationship lacked formal legal status and was kept confidential, the pair entered into a de facto agreement grounded in fidelity, an expectation of enduring commitment, and a 'friendship for life oath.' This oath comprised stipulations for mutual defense, support, and the safeguarding of the relationship's confidentiality. The case serves as a landmark discovery in the legal and cultural history of LGBTQ+ relationships in Poland, shedding light on the legal intricacies and social dynamics of same-sex partnerships during this period.

Limited symbolic recognition
In 2004, the Warsaw Public Transport Authority's decision to allow cohabiting partners of gay and lesbian employees to travel free on the city's public transport system was the first case of recognition of same-sex couples in Poland. In 2007, a decision of Chorzów's City Center of Social Assistance recognized persons living in a common relationship in the same household as a family, for various purposes associated with the center.

At the end of 2010, a court in Złotów decided that the same-sex partner of a woman who had died was entitled to continue the lease on their communal apartment. The municipality appealed the verdict, but the District Court in Poznań rejected the appeal. Thus, the decision of the Złotów court became final. "The court found that these women actually remained in a stable partnership. Any other interpretation would lead to discrimination based on sexual orientation," said the president of the District Court in Złotów, Adam Jutrzenka-Trzebiatowski.

2018 European Court of Justice ruling
On 5 June 2018, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that European Union member states (including Poland) must recognise the freedom of movement and residency rights of same-sex spouses, provided one partner is an EU citizen. The Court ruled that EU member states may choose whether or not to allow same-sex marriage, but they cannot obstruct the freedom of residence of an EU citizen and their spouse. Furthermore, the Court ruled that the term "spouse" is gender-neutral, and that it does not necessarily imply a person of the opposite sex.

Before 2005
The first legislative proposal to recognise unregistered cohabiting couples (including same-sex couples) was proposed in 2002, but did not advance.

In 2004, under a left-wing government, the Senate approved a bill allowing gay and lesbian couples to register their relationships as civil unions. The civil unions proposed by the bill would have given couples a range of benefits, protections and responsibilities currently granted only to opposite-sex married couples, including pension funds, joint tax and death-related benefits, but did not grant the right to adopt children. The bill was passed with 38 votes in favour, 23 against and 15 abstentions. It lapsed due to the 2005 general election.

Only two parties, the Democratic Left Alliance-Labour Union (SLD) and the Social Democracy of Poland (both social democratic parties) supported the bill, while Civic Platform (PO), the League of Polish Families and Law and Justice (PiS) opposed it. Samoobrona was neutral, and the Polish People's Party (PSL) did not take a position.

2005–2011
A new registered partnership bill was proposed to the Government of Civic Platform and the Polish People's Party in late 2007, but was rejected. In 2008, a fourth bill on registered partnerships was prepared by the opposition SLD, but was never introduced to the Parliament due to its low chance of success.

In June 2009, gay and lesbian organisations submitted a petition calling for registered partnerships to the Speaker of the Sejm, Bronisław Komorowski (PO). By this point, some politicians from parties opposed to same-sex unions, including Jerzy Buzek (PO) and Michał Kamiński (PiS), had expressed support for certain rights being granted to same-sex couples. Attitudes from some representatives of the church had also changed. In January 2010, the opposition SLD, in consultation with LGBT organisations, prepared a new draft law on registered partnerships, modelled on the bill approved by the Senate in 2004 and similar to the French pacte civil de solidarité (PACS). However, the bill had no chance of getting passed in Parliament as PO, PiS and PSL announced that they would not support it.

On 17 May 2011, the SLD presented a draft law on registered partnerships, which would regulate the relationships of same-sex and opposite-sex unmarried couples, similar to the French PACS law. Agnieszka Pomaska, Deputy Secretary-General of the Platforma Obywatelska, commented that it was time to discuss the legal regulation of informal relationships, both opposite-sex and same-sex and that PO was open to discussing registered partnerships. Prime Minister Donald Tusk (PO) announced that the law on registered partnerships would be passed at the beginning of the next term of the Sejm, but Speaker of the Sejm Grzegorz Schetyna (PO) said that a vote would not be put to Parliament during that legislative term. However, after receiving a petition in favour of the registered partnership bill signed by 23,500 people, Speaker Schetyna declared that he would probably submit the bill for its first reading in Parliament after 10 July 2011. Krzysztof Tyszkiewicz, spokesman of the PO parliamentary group, announced that the party would support the SLD bill, but only after the parliamentary elections in October 2011.

In July 2011, the Social and Family Policy Commission and the Justice and Human Rights Commission held a first reading of the registered partnership bill. Out of the 67 (32 PO, 23 PiS, 7 SLD, 2 PSL, 3 non-attached) members of the committees, 29 voted in favour, 10 voted against and 3 abstained.

After the bill passed its first reading in the Sejm, the Supreme Court of Poland expressed its opinion on 9 October 2011, before the elections. The Court undermined any further progress of the bill, highlighting numerous legal deficiencies. It also stated that the registration of cohabiting opposite-sex couples was incompatible with Article 18 of the Polish Constitution. Regarding the relationships of same-sex couples, it stated that the admissibility and scope of any statutory regulation required an analysis taking into account international legal obligations, and considering the implications of recent judgments by the European Court of Human Rights. According to professor Miroslaw Wyrzykowski, head of the Department of Human Rights at the University of Warsaw's Faculty of Law, and a former judge of the Polish Constitutional Court, the Constitution requires the introduction of civil partnerships. In the end, the bill was never voted upon by Parliament and therefore expired.

2011–2015
After the parliamentary elections of 9 October 2011, Janusz Palikot, the leader of the Palikot Movement (RP), declared that a bill on civil partnerships would be one of the first draft laws submitted to the new Parliament. Leszek Miller, head of the SLD parliamentary grouping, announced that they would reintroduce the same bill as had been introduced in the previous parliaments. Rafał Grupiński, vice president of the PO parliamentary grouping, announced that its members would have a free vote on the draft law. Stanisław Żelichowski, head of the PSL parliamentary grouping, said that he expected the SLD's bill to be mostly ignored by Parliament.

A new draft law based on the one adopted by the Senate in 2004 (similar to the Scandinavian model, not the French PACS), applying to same-sex couples only, would be prepared and submitted to Parliament in early December 2011, as a joint initiative of the SLD and the RP. Some members of the PO also declared their support. PSL did not state a firm position on the issue but was believed to be in support. Only PiS were opposed, though some of its members, such as Witold Waszczykowski, signalled their support.

Polish MEP Agnieszka Kozłowska-Rajewicz described the adoption of the law on civil partnerships as one of her priorities, though she added that the ideal would be the introduction of same-sex marriage. She also said that civil partnerships similar to the French PACS were the form of unions over which there was agreement at the time and that the law would be enacted in that parliamentary term. Separately, a government report, entitled Poland 2030 Third wave of modernity – Long-term National Development Strategy, stated that an objective for the five-year period to 2015 should be the equalization of rights for stable unmarried couples. Arthur Dunin (PO) commented that many PO parliamentarians saw the need for such a partnership law, provided that it did not go too far. Such a law, which would enable the legal recognition of both same-sex and opposite-sex couples, would be similar to the French PACS, and would also have the support of conservative members of the PO.

On 13 January 2012, the SLD and RP jointly presented two draft laws on civil partnerships to the Sejm. The first bill was the same that had failed in the previous Sejm, similar to the French PACS law (for same-sex and opposite-sex couples), whereas the second bill was similar to the Scandinavian model (for same-sex couples only). The PO intended to introduce its own bill, similar to the French PACS law but including some differences between civil unions and marriages, as required for consistency with the Constitution. On 28 June, the Legislative Committee expressed the opinion that both bills were unconstitutional. On 24 July, the Polish Sejm voted against the submission for a first reading on the two bills. One day later, the Civic Platform (PO) proposed its own bill on "civil partnership agreements", which was submitted to the Parliament in September.

All three drafts were rejected on 25 January 2013 by the plenary session of the Sejm, with the most narrow defeat being for the bill proposed by Civic Platform, which lost by 211–228.

2015–present
Following the 2015 parliamentary elections, the socially conservative PiS, which is opposed to registered partnerships, formed the new Government.

A new registered partnership bill was proposed on 12 February 2018 by the Modern party. It was introduced to the Sejm in April 2018.

European Court of Human Rights cases
In July 2020, the European Court of Human Rights notified the Polish government of cases filed by Polish same-sex couples, inviting the Polish government to present its position on the issue (Andersen v. Poland ). Based on the precedents of Oliari and Others v Italy, in which the court found that "the absence of a legal framework allowing for recognition and protection of [applicants] relationship violates their rights under Article 8 of the Convention", and Orlandi and Others v. Italy, in which the ECtHR ruled that Italy must recognize same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions, advocates hope that the cases will lead to legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Poland. If a friendly settlement is not reached, the cases will take months or years to go to trial.

In a judgment issued on 12 December 2023 in the case of Przybyszewska and Others v. Poland (applications nos. 11454/17 and 9 others), the European Court of Human Rights ruled that by failing to legalise same-sex unions, Poland had violated the right to respect for private and family life (Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights).

Poland has an obligation to implement this judgment and legalise same-sex unions without delay. On 27 December 2023, Poland's new Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, announced that a bill to legalise same-sex unions would be introduced and debated in the Sejm in early 2024.

Same-sex marriage
Article 18 of the Constitution of Poland states that: "Małżeństwo jako związek kobiety i mężczyzny, rodzina, macierzyństwo i rodzicielstwo znajdują się pod ochroną i opieką Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej. English translation: Marriage, as a union of a man and a woman, as well as the family, motherhood and parenthood, shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland."

The article was adopted in 1997. The purpose of the article has been to ensure that legislators would not be able to legalize same-sex marriage without changing the Constitution. Jurists have generally interpreted it as a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Several lawyers and jurists have argued that the article does not formally define marriage, and while promoting opposite-sex marriages, does not in itself ban same-sex marriage.

On 7 July 2004, the Supreme Court stated that: "The term "cohabitation" refers only to concubinage, and in particular to the relationship between persons of different sexes, corresponding to the actual status of marriage (which according to Article 18 of the Constitution, is solely a union between persons of different sexes)."

On 11 May 2005, the Constitutional Tribunal ruled that: "The Polish Constitution specifies marriage as a union of exclusively of a woman and a man. Thus, a contrario, it does not allow same-sex relationships. [...] Marriage (as a union of a woman and a man) has obtained a separate constitutional status within the domestic law of the Republic of Poland, on the basis of Article 18 of the Constitution. Any change of this status would be possible only by the way of an amendment to the Constitution, according to Article 235 thereof.)"

On 9 November 2010, the Constitutional Tribunal held that: "The doctrine of constitutional law also indicates that the only normative element that can be decoded from Article 18 of the Constitution is the principle of heterosexuality of marriage."

On 25 October 2016, the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland stated that: "The Act on Publicly Funded Healthcare Benefits does not explain, however, who is a spouse. But this concept is sufficiently and clearly defined in the aforementioned Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which refers to marriage as a union between a woman and a man. The literature emphasizes that Article 18 of the Constitution establishes the principle of heterosexuality of marriage, [...] which prohibits lawmakers from statutory granting the status of marriage to relationships between persons of the same sex. Therefore, it is obvious that marriage in the light of the Constitution, and hence, in the light of Polish law, can only be, and is only a heterosexual union, and thus same-sex individuals cannot be spouses in a marriage."

In 2018, ruling on the recognition of foreign same-sex marriages, the Supreme Administrative Court of Poland ruled that "Article 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which defines marriage as a union of a man and a woman, [...] requires to treat only a heterosexual union as a marriage in Poland". Specifically, the court ruled that registering same-sex marriages performed outside of Poland would breach the Constitution and the Private International Law Act (Ustawa z dnia 4 lutego 2011 r. Prawo prywatne międzynarodowe).

Seeking to test the legal wording, a same-sex couple, vloggers Jakub and Dawid, applied to have their Portuguese marriage recognised. Their application was rejected by the Civil Registry in Warsaw, but they appealed to a Voivode. After their case was rejected by the Voivode, they filed suit. On 8 January 2019, the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny w Warszawie, the administrative court for the Masovian Voivodeship, ruled that their marriage could not be recognised under Polish law. However, it did rule that should the Family Code and other statutes provide for the institution of same-sex marriage than article 18 would not provide a direct obstacle. The Campaign Against Homophobia praised the ruling, while the Ministry of Justice questioned the court's legal authority. The couple sought legal advice on whether to appeal certain parts of the ruling, namely those pertaining to the refusal to recognise their marriage.

Public opinion
Recent polls have found conflicting numbers in relation to same-sex marriage, with some pollsters finding majorities against, but others finding majorities in support. In general, however, a trend in favor of same-sex marriage, registered partnerships and LGBTQ rights has been observed over the years. All opinion polls since 2022 have found that a majority of Poles supported same-sex civil partnerships.

The 2015 Eurobarometer found that 28% of Poles thought that same-sex marriage should be allowed throughout Europe, 61% were against. This was an 11% increase from the previous Eurobarometer, which was conducted in 2006. Additionally, the number of those who "strongly opposed" same-sex marriage almost halved from 2006 to 2015. The 2019 Eurobarometer found a large increase in support, with 45% of Poles in support of same-sex marriage, and 50% opposed. This increase of 17% was the second-highest in the European Union, after Germany at 18%. Of countries forming the former Eastern Bloc (excluding East Germany), Poland ranked second in support for same-sex marriage, after the Czech Republic.

A GLOBSEC survey conducted in March 2023 showed that 54% of Poles supported same-sex marriage, while 38% were opposed. This was the first time ever a poll had found majority support for same-sex marriage in Poland.

The 2023 Eurobarometer found that 50% of Poles agreed that same-sex marriage should be legalized throughout Europe (up from 45% in 2019) while 45% disagreed. This is the first time a majority of Poles support same-sex marriage in an Eurobarometer, showing a steady increase in support for LGBT rights.

In a poll conducted in April 2024 by United Surveys, 50% of respondents supported same-sex marriage and 66% supported same-sex civil partnership. 86% of supporters of the ruling coalition supported same-sex marriage and 97% supported same-sex civil partnerships.

In a poll conducted in June 2024 by Rzeczpospolita, 62.6% of respondents supported same-sex civil partnership.

An Ipsos poll in June 2024 found that 67% of Poles support the right of same-sex couples to marry or legally register their relationship.

Views on homosexuality
In September 2021, the percentage of respondents who personally know someone LGBT reached a record 43%. Respondents were also asked whether they agreed that:
 * homosexuality is not normal and must not be tolerated (17%)
 * homosexuality is a deviation from the norm, but it should be tolerated (51%)
 * homosexuality is normal (23%)
 * Hard to say (9%)

In total, 74% of Poles tolerate homosexuality, while 17% do not.

CBOS polls
The 2013 poll found that support for same-sex registered partnerships varied significantly by political parties. 68% of Your Movement (formerly RP) voters supported registered partnerships, 56% of SLD voters, 50% of PO voters, 24% of PSL voters and 15% of PiS voters.

Support for registered partnerships is higher among young people, people who have a higher education, who live in big cities, who have a higher income, who are less religious and who are politically left-wing.


text: User talk:84.47.54.137

title: User talk:84.47.54.137


text:
Jeff Jacobson (politician)

Jeff Jacobson is an American consultant, former attorney, and former politician. He was a Republican member of the Ohio Senate, representing the 6th District starting in 2001. Previously he was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives from 1992 until 2000.

Biography
Jeff Jacobson graduated cum laude with a B.A. from Yale University and received his J.D. summa cum laude from The University of Dayton. Jacobson was a member of the Ohio House of Representatives from 1992 until 2000. He then represented the 6th District in the Ohio Senate starting in 2001. After easily winning reelection to the Senate in 2004, Jacobson was elected to the No. 2 spot as president pro tempore under Senator Bill Harris.

In 2003, it was reported that he was in a strong position to become Senate president in January 2005. At the time, he was Majority Whip, and as whip he chaired the committee that amended HB274 in December 2002. In 2005, as Senate President pro tempore he sponsored Senate Bill 9 to require specific provisions for aircraft in Ohio to be secured, with a milder version passing later. In 2014, he took part in secret negotiations to propose a constitutional amendment to change the redistricting process in Ohio, and the resulting House Joint Resolution 12 was 80-4 before going to the Senate, where it underwent mild changes before being approved by the Senate and then Ohio voters. He also authored the Ohio law requiring that public employees disclose any intent to collect retirement early. In 2006, Bill Harris was Senate president, apologizing after a shouting match evolved from a debate being held between Jacobson and Democratic Senator Ray Miller over racism. During his sixteen years in public service, he enacted legislation on topics such as education reform, tax policy, criminal justice, nursing home reimbursement formulas, election and campaign finance law, the abolition of predatory mortgage lending and the regulation of payday lending, collective bargaining and prevailing wage law, and electric utility re-regulation. He left office due to reaching the end of term limits. He officially retired from politics in 2008, leaving to become a public policy consultant to clients such as the Ohio Business Roundtable. He served as a member of the Ohio State Medical Board from 2008 until 2009, and as a member of the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority from 2009 until 2014, in both cases appointed by former Governor Ted Strickland. Jacobson has worked as a strategist, consultant, and policy expert for a range of business and non-profit clients.

By 2018, he had been employed by the payday industry as a lobbyist. By 2020, he was a lobbyist representing beer wholesalers, utilities and payday lenders. In 2020, he was also helping GOP lawmakers search for a new speaker, although he asserted that he was only offering insight, not overseeing the process. He is President of Strategic Insight Group, Ltd., a consulting and governmental relations firm serving private, public, and non-profit clients interested in impacting public policy development and state governmental decision-making in Ohio.

title: Jeff Jacobson (politician)


text:
Trail of the Pink Panther

Trail of the Pink Panther is a 1982 comedy film directed by Blake Edwards and starring Peter Sellers. It is the seventh film in The Pink Panther series, the first film in the series following Sellers's death and also the last in which he appeared as Inspector Clouseau. Sellers died 18 months before production began; his performance consists entirely of scenes from previous films (many of them outtakes). The newly shot material in the film stars Joanna Lumley as journalist Marie Jouvet searching for the missing Clouseau – and running afoul of the inspector's enemies who do not wish to see him return.

Plot
When the famous Pink Panther diamond is stolen again from Lugash, Chief Inspector Clouseau is called on the case despite protests by Chief Inspector Dreyfus. While on the case, Clouseau is pursued by the Mafia. Clouseau first goes to London to interrogate Sir Charles Litton (having forgotten that he lives in the South of France). Traveling to the airport, he accidentally blows up his car trying to fix a pop-out lighter, but mistakenly believes it an assassination attempt, and disguises himself in a heavy cast on the flight, which causes complications in the air and on land. He then is led to an awkward introduction to the Scotland Yard detectives at Heathrow. Meanwhile, Dreyfus learns from Scotland Yard that Libyan terrorists have marked Clouseau for assassination, but permits him to continue. At the hotel, Clouseau has a miscommunication with the hotel clerk and gets knocked out a window several times, trying to get his message from Dreyfus.

Clouseau's flight disappears over the ocean en route to Lugash, and Marie Jouvet, a television reporter covering the story, sets out to interview those who know him best. Among the people she interviews are Dreyfus; Hercule Lajoy; Cato Fong; and former jewel thief Sir Charles Litton, who is married to Clouseau's ex-wife Lady Simone.

All of these interview scenes provide flashbacks to scenes of earlier Pink Panther films (The Pink Panther, A Shot in the Dark, The Return of the Pink Panther, The Pink Panther Strikes Again, and Revenge of the Pink Panther); but Jouvet also interviews Clouseau's father, at his winery in the south of France, providing glimpses of Clouseau's childhood, and his early career during college, nearly leading him to commit suicide after a girl of his dreams marries another person, especially in the French Resistance involving him failing to detonate a bridge full of crossing Nazis. Jouvet also questions Mafia don Bruno Langlois, a mafia boss antagonist who would appear in the next film, and tries to file a complaint against him with Chief Inspector Dreyfus; but Dreyfus refuses to press charges.

The film ends with Jouvet hoping that Clouseau might be alive somewhere, as she states: "Did Inspector Clouseau really perish in the sea, as reported? Or for reasons as yet unknown, is he out there someplace, plotting his next move, waiting to reveal himself when the time is right? I am reluctant to believe that misfortune has really struck down such a great man." Clouseau is seen glancing over a seaside cliff, when a seagull flies over and defecates on the sleeve of his coat. The words "Swine seagull!" are heard in the distinctive exaggerated French accent of Clouseau.

The next shot shows the animated Pink Panther in trench coat and trilby hat, revealed to be in place of Clouseau watching the sunset; he turns around to face the camera and flashes his coat open, but his trench coat reveals a montage of clips of Peter Sellers from his five Pink Panther films as a tribute to him, while the end credits roll.

Cast

 * Joanna Lumley as Marie Jouvet
 * Herbert Lom as Chief Insp. Charles Dreyfus
 * David Niven as Sir Charles Litton (voiced by Rich Little)
 * André Maranne as Sgt. François Chevalier
 * Robert Loggia as Bruno Langois
 * Richard Mulligan as Monsieur Clouseau
 * Burt Kwouk as Cato Fong
 * Capucine as Lady Simone Litton
 * Graham Stark as Hercule Lajoy
 * Ronald Fraser as Dr Longet
 * Colin Blakely as Alec Drummond
 * Peter Arne as Col. Bufoni
 * Harold Kasket as President of Lugash
 * Daniel Peacock as Clouseau age 18
 * Lucca Mezzofanti as Clouseau age 8
 * Denise Crosby as Denise, Bruno's moll

Previously unseen footage only

 * Peter Sellers as Chief Inspector Jacques Clouseau
 * Harvey Korman as Prof. Auguste Balls
 * Leonard Rossiter as Superintendent Quinlan
 * Dudley Sutton as Inspector McLaren
 * Marne Maitland as Deputy Commissioner Lasorde
 * Liz Smith as Martha
 * Harold Berens as Hotel Clerk
 * Claire Davenport as Hotel Maid

Previously seen footage only

 * Robert Wagner as George Litton
 * Claudia Cardinale as Princess Dala
 * Colin Gordon as Tucker

Production
Sellers died in late July 1980, a year and a half before production began, and his performance was constructed from deleted scenes from The Pink Panther Strikes Again. David Niven appears in the film, reprising his role of Sir Charles Lytton, which he first played in the original The Pink Panther of 1963. Niven was in the early stages of ALS, and his voice subsequently proved too weak to loop his own dialogue during post-production; as a result, his lines were dubbed by impressionist Rich Little.

Returning series regulars include Herbert Lom as Chief Inspector Dreyfus, Graham Stark as Hercule LaJoy (last seen in the 1964 Pink Panther film A Shot in the Dark), Burt Kwouk as Clouseau's faithful man servant Cato and André Maranne as Sgt. François Chevalier. Trail featured the animated opening and closing credits, animated by Richard Williams. Director Blake Edwards dedicated the film to Sellers, "the one and only Inspector Clouseau."

Despite the dedication, Sellers's widow Lynne Frederick filed a $3 million lawsuit against the film's producers and MGM/UA, claiming that the film diminished Sellers's reputation, and was awarded over $1 million in damages. Despite this, however, there was a practical reason behind Frederick's suing of Edwards. Her primary objection was that Sellers had actually vetoed the use of outtakes from earlier Panthers in his lifetime and that his estate should have had the right to control the use of outtakes after his death. The reason the question of outtakes being used had come up in Sellers's lifetime was that Edwards had shot and edited a two hour version of Strikes Again, hoping to recapture the zany spectacle of The Great Race, with Dreyfus as the melodramatic villain in the fashion of Jack Lemmon's Professor Fate. United Artists vetoed this long version and the film was drastically cut from two hours to just over an hour and a half. There have been rumors that a three hour cut existed as well, but no evidence of any additional scenes not included in either film has ever emerged to support these claims.

After Sellers died, UA tried to get Dudley Moore to take on Clouseau in the Sellers-penned Romance of the Pink Panther. Moore refused to do it without Edwards directing and was willing to play Clouseau only one time as a tribute to Sellers (knowing Romance was to have ended the series, according from a Los Angeles Times interview with Moore in 1980). UA wanted the series to continue, but Edwards refused to cast another actor as Clouseau, possibly recalling the negative reception that Inspector Clouseau (1968) suffered upon release. The production featured Alan Arkin in the title role and was without the involvement of Edwards and Sellers.

After Arthur made Moore a huge star, he was unwilling to talk about committing to a film series. MGM/UA wanted a transition film if Edwards was to introduce a new character as the series' star. Using outtakes was, according to Edwards, a brilliant idea (shooting scripts for Return, Strikes Again, and Revenge demonstrate a great amount of comedic material from the three films that was left on the cutting room floor). Edwards had originally hoped to construct a Citizen Kane-esque narrative, with Clouseau having gone missing at the very beginning of the story, whilst the memories of the supporting characters would showcase the deleted or unused content. Unfortunately, MGM/UA refused to pay ITC the fee they were asking for the use of the Return outtakes, and Edwards fell behind schedule on shooting Trail/Curse (MGM/UA also ended up cutting both films' budgets considerably), with the result being that Trail failed to live up to its potential.

Edwards's wife, Julie Andrews, has an unbilled cameo as a cleaning lady, dressed as her friend Carol Burnett's charwoman character.

Soundtrack
Unusually the soundtrack album by Henry Mancini featured a compilation of themes from other Pink Panther movies, with only "Trail Of The Pink Panther (Main Title)" and "The Easy Life In Paris" being from the film itself. The other tracks included "It Had Better Be Tonight (Meglio Stasera)" (from The Pink Panther), the title theme from A Shot in the Dark, "The Return Of The Pink Panther (Parts I And II)" and "The Greatest Gift" (from The Return of the Pink Panther), "Come To Me", "The Inspector Clouseau Theme" and "Bier Fest Polka" (from The Pink Panther Strikes Again), and "Simone", "After the Shower" and "Hong Kong Fireworks" (from Revenge of the Pink Panther).

The soundtrack album for the film was released by Liberty Records (LT-51139).

Critical and commercial reception
The film was a critical failure. Although the film was marketed as a tribute to Sellers, the sequel was universally disdained. On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes, the film has an approval rating of 23% based on 13 reviews, with an average score of 4.30/10. On Metacritic, the film has a weighted average score of 43 out of 100 based on 8 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews".

It was released for Christmas 1982 and grossed only $9 million – $27,294,248.70 in 2022 dollars ($1,341,695 on opening weekend in 800 theaters; $3,247,458 on opening week) against its $6 million budget. In contrast, the previous film in the series, Revenge of the Pink Panther, had made over $49 million. Nonetheless, it was soon followed by a further Pink Panther film, Curse of the Pink Panther, which was shot concurrently with Trail. That film did not feature Peter Sellers at all (with the exception of some archival voice work, for which he was not given credit) and instead featured Ted Wass as Clouseau's replacement Clifton Sleigh. The latter film was also a critical and commercial disaster.

title: Trail of the Pink Panther


text:
Talk:Source code repository

Page was misspelled
Is this page misspelled (and should be replaced)?
 * This was fixed. --Amit 05:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Source code repository