text:
Talk:Rent control in the United States

Help
I would like to take a minute to ask the wikipedia community for help in reviewing an issue that I feel deserves special attention. I will try to be as schematic and objective as possible:

1. Topic: Two Wikipedia articles, namely "Rent control in the United States" and "Rent regulation", contain a statement that reads as follows: "There is a consensus among economists that rent control reduces the quality and quantity of housing".

2. This statement was added to the article (without any consensus and without any discussion on the talk page) by Snooganssnoogans on 24 December 2020 at 14:5 (see ).

3. I have extensively argued the lack of neutrality of these articles on the Neutral Point of View Noticeboard. As can be seen, many users (e.g. SPECIFICO, TFD, Dennis Bratland, Qzekrom,Charles Stewart) seem to agree that the statement is false (their arguments and weight in the conversation are being ignored by the users who act as the custodians of these pages). Only vague references that are not specific (general economics textbooks), opinion articles, and an article published by a think tank are used by these users as references to substantiate the claim. But the fact is that there is not a single study that can verify the veracity of this claim. Not to mention the obvious interest that these users have in this claim appearing in the second entry of the article, at the top, so that it reads well, even before technically explaining what exactly rent control is. Arguments and counter-arguments can be found on the NPOV Noticeboard.

4. In any case, what is serious is that although it is a manifest fact that there is no agreement among the users who discuss there, the article maintains the statement without any consensus and furthermore the article is not labelled as lacking neutrality.

5. And what is more dangerous: when I argued and reversed the claim that was added without consensus, I was persecuted and blocked. Isn't this outrageous? Users who debate and reverse changes that are added without consensus are blocked, while those who introduce statements without being debated and agreed with the wikipedia community are favoured with blocking those who argue against them.

In conclusion, I would simply like to draw attention to something fundamental at stake, which is the neutrality of our encyclopaedia. With this message, I would like to draw more eyes to what is going on there. And if anyone, bureaucrat, administrator or user considers that some action should be taken to help the neutrality of the encyclopaedia, I would be very grateful. If there is one clear rule on wikipedia it is that the content of the pages must be neutral and consensual among users. The statement we are talking about is not backed by consensus within the community, and users who fight for neutrality are being blocked.

At this point, given that I am not sure where to turn for help within the wikipedia community, I've decided to make a call here to some bureaucrats who seem to have an interest in issues of neutrality: e.g. SilkTork,Cecropia,UninvitedCompany,Dweller (sincere apologies if you are not interested in this issue)... but if anybody knows of other users that might be interested in this problem, let me know.

Many thanks, 193.52.24.13 (talk) 14:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

 * The place to have this discussion is the talkpage of the relevant article, and I will copy this there.
 * I have had a quick look at the article and a very quick look at the issue. The sentence you object to is correct, and is well supported by cites to reliable sources. It is not something to argue over. However, the lead (I haven't studied the whole article) positions itself as an argument against rent control, and it doesn't explain the benefits. So, yes, the lead (and possibly the article itself) is biased. However, while Wikipedia aims to be neutral and balanced, many articles (possibly the majority) are biased in one way or another. It is a constant struggle to identify and correct bias. When we introduce bias ourselves, we rarely see it. Such is the nature of bias. The way to fix bias is to discuss and edit and discuss and edit. It can take a long time. And a fair balance is not always achieved even after years of polite, collegial discussion and working toward neutral consensus edits. Neutrality and fair balance is rarely achieved over-night, and pinging others rarely helps, as we each have our own areas of concern. Here are some articles that others have flagged up as needing attention for being biased: Category:Articles needing POV-check and Category:NPOV_disputes. As you see, there are thousands of articles which have been tagged as of concern going back over ten years.
 * To edit without conflict on Wikipedia people need to be able to put things in perspective, and to work together with others in a friendly supportive manner. This may appear to be a big issue to you, but in reality it is simply an everyday thing on Wikipedia.
 * My suggestion is to find reliable sources which discuss both the benefits and the drawbacks, and then to propose on the talkpage edits which put rent control into proper context, explaining both benefits and drawbacks. I hope this helps. SilkTork (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is that 1. the claim is false (not a single reliable study to substantiate the specific claim --instead, we have studies putting forward arguments in favour and also against, which is not the same as being able to say there is a consensus on the specific issue--), and 2. there is not consensus among wikipedia users. Then, why do we keep the claim in the article?193.52.24.13 (talk) 17:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * speaks a lot of sense. Especially what he says about working in a friendly manner. I also recommend How to put up a straight pole by pushing it at an angle. --Dweller (talk) Old fashioned is the new thing! 19:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The IP editor has been harping on this issue for months now, getting blocked as Sockpuppet investigations/Pedrote112 while participating in the discussion at Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. The IP editor has been violating WP:Tendentious editing by persistently beating this dead horse. Personally, I'm sympathetic to the idea that rent control has some real world benefits that are not properly valued by economists, but in multiple high quality sources, most economists agree that rent control is not beneficial to those who need it most. The tendentious part is the IP's continued assertion that there is no consensus. Binksternet (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Binksternet. I was not blocked as Sockpuppet, I was blocked because some users didn't like my arguments and they consider they have the right to add this sentence in the article without any consensus with the rest of the users. I am persistent because the arguments of the users against this statement are being permanently ignored. There is not a consensus on whether this claim is true (see ). Seriously, am I the only one here who is violating the rules? When did this statement first appear? Was there agreement among users to introduce it? What are the credible studies that analyse the percentage of economists for and against this statement? Do those of us who argue against it (not just me) have the right to insist because we see it as a clear case of non-neutrality? Cheers, 193.52.24.13 (talk) 20:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Some references counter-arguing:
 * A 2007 study by David Sims and a 2014 study by Autor, Palmer, and Pathak  both look at the effects of the end of rent control in Massachusetts, after the passage of Question 9 by Massachusetts ballot referendum in 1994. Sims found that the end of rent control had little effect on the construction of new housing. He did however find evidence that rent control decreased the number of available rental units, by encouraging condo conversions. In other words, rent control seemed to affect the quantity of rental housing, but not the total quantity of the housing stock. Unsurprisingly, Sims also found significant increases in rent charged after decontrol, suggesting that rent control was effective in limiting rent increases.

 * A 2007 study by Gilderbloom and Ye of more recent rent control laws here in New Jersey finds evidence that rent controls actually increase the supply of rental housing, by incentivizing landlords to subdivide larger rental units.

 * A 2015 study by Ambrosius, Glderbloom, and coauthors also looks at changes in New Jersey rent regulations. As with the previous study, they find that rent control in New Jersey has not produced any detectable reduction in new housing supply.

 * The most recent major study of rent control, by Diamond McQuade, and Qian in 2018, uses detailed data on San Francisco housing market to look at the effect of the mid-1990s change in rent control rules there. They suggest that while the law did effectively limit rent increases, and had no effect on new housing construction, it did have a negative effect on the supply of rental housing by encouraging condo conversions.193.52.24.13 (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

 * God, I hate arguing on the side of rent control opponents, I really do. But here is a sampling of the literature regarding what economists think of rent control:
 * Professor Moshe Adler, economist at Columbia University writes, "Yet for modern economists rent control is the quintessential example of a policy that is not Pareto efficient." Page 36 of Economics for the Rest of Us: Debunking the Science that Makes Life Dismal. The New Press, 2009. ISBN 9781595585271
 * Alain Bertaud, Senior Research Scholar at New York University's Marron Institute of Urban Management, wrote about common mistakes in urban planning: "For instance, policies like rent control, greenbelts, new light rail transports, among others, are constantly repeated in spite of a near consensus on their failure to achieve their objectives." Page 364 of Order without Design: How Markets Shape Cities. MIT Press, 2018. ISBN 9780262349222
 * Peter Navarro wrote in 1985 that, "On the subject of rent control, the economics profession has reached a rare consensus: Rent control creates many more problems than it solves." The Public Interest, 1985. Also quoted in David W. Conklin's 1991 Comparative Economic Systems: Objectives, Decision Modes, and the Process of Choice.
 * What we should be doing here is telling the reader about the findings of economists who are in disagreement with the "near consensus" of their chosen profession, while at the same time continuing to tell the reader that the mainstream view is fairly well established against rent control. We should be giving more credence to the minority view so that the reader can see why rent control has been implemented in so many places. Binksternet (talk) 22:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Bink -- Peter Navarro??? 🤦♂🤷♂  SPECIFICO talk 12:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Binksternet, the cite from Economics for the Rest of Us: Debunking the Science that Makes Life Dismal is quoting a section that's entirely facetious. Not sure where you found that quote, but it appears to be deliberately taken out of context. The entire chapter is dedicated to debunking Pareto efficiency, and continues: "Rent control is not Pareto efficient, we shall see, because it lets middle-class families live in apartments they otherwise could not afford, and because it therefore does not maximize the sum of consumer surpluses." I don't believe the chapter supports the idea that rent control reduces the quality and quantity of available housing, and find this use of the source disingenuous. I concur with those against the inclusion of the statement in the article; I find a lot of these sources suspect at best and think they're worth further review. I'll see if I can spend some time finding contrary sources, but understand the frustration that this was ever included in the article in the first place. Ewwwphoria (talk) 22:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Anyway, I think there are two problems. 1. There's a lot of Reagan/Milton Friedman era economic "wisdom" that all regulation is very very bad. This kind of POV was rationalized in hundreds of articles that flooded the academic journals, and it creates inertia when we use WEIGHT to assess current best thinking and more critical neutral expert analysis of the issues. We could similarly find weight of the references to support all sorts of now-discarded theories in many academic disciplines. 2- Rent control to my knowledge was generally applied to an existing stock of old housing while new housing was not controlled. So, for example, in New York City, housing build after a certain date was exempt with the result that older buildings were sold to the tenants as co-ops or condos while a lot of new buildings were erected at market rate rents. That's quite the opposite of the Peter Navarro view. But then again, he's Peter Navarro, so...  At any rate, the only way to improve any of these articles is to go through all the WP channels and site-wide noticeboards.  Given the low level of interest in this topic, the articles may be very slow to change regardless of their flaws. I agree however that a constructive step would be to add the most respected and most recent opposing views supported by academic studies. SPECIFICO talk 12:24, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Agreed  SPECIFICO. What can be done to bring this discussion to a serious review of the issue after months of arguments ignored by the people who introduced the sentence without consensus and prevent a fair debate or changes they don't like.197.230.198.10 (talk) 12:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Three problems with the statement
I think there are three problems with the statement: If 193.52.24.13 is right that there are some editors who are asserting ownership of certain economics pages, that is not too hard to remedy. Putting together a decent RfC on the matter would be a place to start. — Charles Stewart |(talk) 06:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) The sources don't actually justify the claim as it will be understood in context. The actual survey question posed by Alston, Kearl, and Vaughan in 1992 was "A ceiling on rents reduces the quantity and quality of  housing available." However, the claimed consensus statement has "rent control", not a "ceiling on rents", and this follows several paragraphs showing the diversity of rent controls that have been proposed. In context, the statement will be taken that a consensus exists against any form of rent control, and that, I think can be refuted. Hypothetically, the consensus claim could be justified by another reliable source, but no more recent, high quality survey of economists has been performed, as far as I know; certainly the overview article by Jenkins and the think tank pieces do not mention any.
 * 2) The sources given are mostly an ad-hoc selection: they are a sampling of sources arguing that there is agreement on rent control without recognition of the existence of a substantial contrary literature. This is not how we write articles if we respect WP:N.
 * 3) A claim in wiki-voice that there is a consensus on a matter is a big claim to make. I just do not think the evidence is there to say one way or another. It's worth contrasting the situation here with that regarding the minimum wage: there is a wealth of varied, high quality surveys of economists on that matter that would allow a consensus to be demonstarated if there was one, but here we have to look back nearly 30 years to find a single quality survey.

 * Yes, well said. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

 * Hi,  SPECIFICO, TFD, Dennis Bratland, Qzekrom,Charles Stewart. Should we put this issue back to discussion or vote in ? No hard evidence was ever left that there is a consensus among economists, nor that there is a consensus among wikipedia users. The statement was introduced by Snooganssnoogans on 24 December 2020 at 14:54. The one who should get a consensus to introduce such a statement is the one who is in favour of it. 2A02:C7E:143A:6000:A0A7:505F:394B:FF6F (talk) 11:29, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Your 'hard evidence' is the six citations attached to the statement. MrOllie (talk) 11:30, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you share with the community the specific pages where the works of those "six citations" provide evidence to validate the claim? Walden03 (talk) 19:05, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Page numbers are already in the citations. MrOllie (talk) 19:38, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Page numbers do not match specific information supporting the claim. They seem trivial citations. 197.230.198.10 (talk) 22:48, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * What is a 'trivial citation'? MrOllie (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * A citation that does not have sufficient value to support an argument. None of the citations in these books are of any value to argue that there is a scholarly consensus on this point of contention. Most of them are general economics books with no explicit mention of the problem.197.230.122.194 (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * By the way, who is Snooganssnoogans, and why didn't he/she get consensus before writing the sentence?197.230.122.194 (talk) 18:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * All of the citations are directly on point, reliable as Wikipedia defines it, and clearly address the claim in question specifically. That you disagree with them does not mean they are of no value. MrOllie (talk) 23:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * False. You are not answering the questions. Show how the citations address each point. Who is Snooganssnoogans, and why didn't he/she get consensus before writing the sentence. And what is this bullying behaviour 197.230.198.10 (talk) 12:27, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If you keep trying to delete properly sourced content with obviously false edit summaries, you will probably get blocked. The standard warning messages you received are simply making you aware of that fact. No one is under any obligation to answer your questions, and they are irrelevant to the article as it stands today. MrOllie (talk) 12:29, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * False again. Not properly sourced content. 197.230.198.10 (talk) 12:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You know very well that waiting a bit after making a non responsive reply does not justify removing this sentence again. MrOllie (talk) 21:59, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've been trying to follow both discussions, and I'd like to try to weight in but for a start I would need a direct quote, or a Google Books/Internet Archive link to the page or chapter for context, of each given refs., with whom I agree to "hate arguing on the side of rent control opponents", provided three refs with quotes, and that's good. I don't doubt that there's a consensus, but I'm not sure the current wording is the best way to do that; it'd be better to have maybe a slightly longer sentence but that it's closer to those quotes. We also really only need the three best refs of the 21st century to avoid WP:REFBOMB, or at least to better distribute them, such as that three refs are given in support of consensus among economists, and three others to support their arguments, in particular making clear which type of rent control or regulation they are discussing, whether any form of rent control, only a certain type, if implemented in a certain way, specific examples, or case studies. Finally, I do share and agree with 's comment. In summary, I'm not opposed to say that there's some consensus among economists, but I believe the sentence can be improved to better reflect the consensus and use of the WP:BESTSOURCES (21st-century academic books and peer-reviewed journals rather than 1980s–1990s refs), and rather than have a bunch of refs to just say "consensus", let's better distribute them so as to better contextualize, clarify, and explain their arguments, what they say, and in which context. Davide King (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I do share 's concerns, and I forgot to say this but I also agree with Binksternet that "[w]e should be giving more credence to the minority view so that the reader can see why rent control has been implemented in so many places." Of course, if there is any other significant minority view as I and Binksternet believe to be, we should also give it some weight, and explain and clarify this, in particular why it remains popular among a certain constituency and is still applied in certain specific cases, and so on; e.g. supporters say the main goal of rent control is, say, lowering housing costs, rather than quality (if I remember correctly, at least a user also higlighted this or said something similar to this effect that the current sentence is missing) and they claim to have been successful at this, or things like these. Davide King (talk) 10:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

 * Thank you very much Davide King for your comments and for bringing some common sense to a forum that is totally biased and controlled by a handful of people. Still, even though your suggestion is on the right track, I only partially agree with what you say. In no case can those three references be taken as anything close to a consensus among economists. And even less so when even today, in many cities around the world, economists who are part of government teams are still implementing rent control measures, and fine-tuning rent control to make it more effective. There are also counter-arguments that are being ignored:
 * A 2007 study by David Sims and a 2014 study by Autor, Palmer, and Pathak  both look at the effects of the end of rent control in Massachusetts, after the passage of Question 9 by Massachusetts ballot referendum in 1994. Sims found that the end of rent control had little effect on the construction of new housing. He did however find evidence that rent control decreased the number of available rental units, by encouraging condo conversions. In other words, rent control seemed to affect the quantity of rental housing, but not the total quantity of the housing stock. Unsurprisingly, Sims also found significant increases in rent charged after decontrol, suggesting that rent control was effective in limiting rent increases.
 * A 2007 study by Gilderbloom and Ye of more recent rent control laws here in New Jersey finds evidence that rent controls actually increase the supply of rental housing, by incentivizing landlords to subdivide larger rental units.
 * A 2015 study by Ambrosius, Glderbloom, and coauthors also looks at changes in New Jersey rent regulations. As with the previous study, they find that rent control in New Jersey has not produced any detectable reduction in new housing supply.
 * The most recent major study of rent control, by Diamond McQuade, and Qian in 2018, uses detailed data on San Francisco housing market to look at the effect of the mid-1990s change in rent control rules there. They suggest that while the law did effectively limit rent increases, and had no effect on new housing construction, it did have a negative effect on the supply of rental housing by encouraging condo conversions.193.52.24.13 (talk) 20:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Other violations are:
 * This statement was added to the article (without any consensus and without any discussion on the talk page) by Snooganssnoogans on 24 December 2020 at 14:5 (see ).
 * No validation-type consideration is even halfway acceptable in the lead paragraph, even before summarising the main ideas on rent control. The fact that this assessment of the supposed existing consensus appears in the lead paragraph is an appalling manifestation of how biased this article is.197.230.198.10 (talk) 17:39, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

 * The sticking point here is the question of what sourcing is required to validate the claim of consensus, my third point. I look at the sources and do not conclude the existence of a consensus for the more general statement, since the evidence in the sources is not evidence that anyone has done a competent job of assessing the opinion of economists. However, there certainly is plenty of evidence that plenty of well-regarded economists feel confident enough in the claim to assert a consensus, and there are Wikipedia guidelines such as WP:MEDSCI that suggest this is good enough for us to report the existence of consensus in wikivoice.
 * I think these guidelines are bad guidelines: the existence of cliques of well-regarded scholars who believe their opinions are consensus in the absence of quality evidence regarding what the aggregate opinions of the population of scholars in that discipline is, I think, fairly common and not just in economics; I seem to recall that there was such a clique that held there is a strong link between minimum-wage rules and unemployment, who were shown to be wrong when the high degree of controversy on that question was finally documented in high quality polls.
 * I suggested before having an RfC. I still think that might be the right step, but I don't like the principle that we settle what we can say in wikivoice about consensus statements by a simple vote, since that invites vote-stacking, and holding a Wikipedia !vote seems problematic since what little we have in the way of guidelines seems transparently bad to me and so closers are not in a good position to separate the wheat from the chaff if there are problems with the RfC. Thoughts? — Charles Stewart (talk) 16:37, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your suggestion Charles Stewart. Would it be possible to initiate the process for this Rfc that you propose? What would it consist of and how do you envision the process? There is another page with the same problem .139.47.67.203 (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * More cases of areas where rent control reduces prices and increases supply: 139.47.67.203 (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I have edited the page slightly, from previous discussion that exhibits a lack of consensus, and my comment has been reverted by one of the page custodians because he considers it vandalism. Does the community consider my edit to be vandalism? I recall that the comment was introduced without prior discussion on the talk page . Here is my edit censored by this user. . 139.47.67.203 (talk) 23:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Your long term, slow motion edit war against the word consensus simply is not going to work. If we must hold an RFC to get you to stop, so be it - this is one of the best cited sentences on Wikipedia and I am sure that the community will not be in favor of deletion. MrOllie (talk) 23:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I was not the one that added such comment without prior discussion or consensus. The lack of consensus on the current sentence is obvious and outrageous. Happy to have a fair revision of the sentence (provided it is fair and not led by a few ideologically biased custodians, as has been the case so far). 139.47.67.203 (talk) 23:27, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course. Everyone who disagrees with you is obviously biased. MrOllie (talk) 23:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Restore to stable version
I requested this page be protected because an anon editor continually deleted content that had been included in the article for years despite being reverted by multiple others (and, from what I gather, may be evading a block). In between when I made the request and when the request was granted, anon came back and deleted the text again. I am requesting that the article be restored to the last stable version. Slugger O'Toole (talk) 15:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

 * This is almost certainly evading their block, yes. MrOllie (talk) 15:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * MrOllie, a true vandal, the user that attacks other users, and acts as a custodian of this page, violating WPOV and maintaining a statement that was added without prior discussion on the talk page (read all discussion). MrOllie, a user who deletes scientific references. Who is MrOllie? Google to find out. 81.0.36.0 (talk) 15:58, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Such request is controversial. No consensus, read talk page and WNPOV. 81.0.36.0 (talk) 16:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I report that MrOllie is harassing me on my talk page. This user does not accept the fact that the statement was added without consensus and that there is no consensus on the statement. He considers that others vandalise wikipedia, not him. 81.0.36.0 (talk) 18:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * If you really think that I'm a vandal, WP:ANI is the place to report that. MrOllie (talk) 18:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I also requested something similar here: User_talk:Daniel_Case --- Avatar317 (talk) 00:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, this seems like a sticky situation. Pinging in case they weren't aware that  overrode their decision to semi protect. This puts any admin reviewing this case in a tricky postion, as technically reducing it back to semi right now would be WP:WHEEL, but on the other hand Daniel, while being otherwise active, does not seem to have replied to the request on his talk page, so the WP:ADMINACCT clause on failure to communicate is also in play. To my eye I think a good case has been made here to reduce the protection, but for the above reasons I am hesistant to go ahead and do so. Just Step Sideways from this world ..... today 18:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that ... I missed the post on my talk page because it got sandwiched in during drama created by an editor being disruptive elsewhere (another example of just how deleterious to the project disruptive editors can be). I will take a look at this later. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking another look, Daniel. I did notice the changed protection. Favonian (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Avatar, to at least respond to some of what you posted on my talk page: If I had known that backstory I would have seen things differently. When we look at protection requests very often all we have to go on is what the report says. This wouldn't be the first time that what appeared to be a new dispute was, in fact, the continuation of an older one not immediately evident in the page history. (More arguments for why we should write some sort of guide for requesting protection (and, just as importantly, reviewing those requests). Daniel Case (talk) 20:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the time and effort you put in as an admin! I'm fine with the article staying as it is until July 3, after which one of us can restore it to Wikipedia consensus.
 * From now on, I will use better edit summaries to try to give as much detail and backstory as possible, so that people like you who are asked to jump into a confusing situation and quickly adjudicate it can hopefully have an easier time understanding what is going on.
 * Question/request: Can we have the pending changes status on this article set to permanent? Like (I think) the Rent regulation article has been protected here ?   Is the RfPP board the proper place to make this request (after the current lock expires)?
 * Reason: The same edit-warring has been going on intermittently for three years now on BOTH of these articles from what appears to be the sock-puppeting of a banned editor: located in France/Spain/Morocco (same behavior and same edit summary complaints). Usually after 3 or 4 reversions by others they go away for several months, which is probably why none of us have asked for Page Protection before now. Thanks!! --- Avatar317 (talk) 00:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @Daniel Case Thank you for taking the time to consider different opinions. Hopefully this will lead to a reasonable resolution of a case that has been going on for more than three years and which began with the addition of the phrase in question, without prior discussion on this talk page.
 * To give more context, it would be good to read all the arguments given on this talk page, as well as here, and more recently at W:NPOV 81.0.36.0 (talk) 11:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I will be doing this ... we do have a holiday weekend coming up here in the US. Daniel Case (talk) 21:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
 * To try to make your likely hour of reading/discovery easier (unless you read faster than me), here's a summary:
 * On Rent control in the United States: Starting 2021-02-22T19:52:36: an IP editor, (193.52.24.13 - France location) whom I believe to also be the same as, and is likely the same IP in this discussion, started edit-warring, with this edit
 * That editor did then "discuss" on the Talk page, here:
 * Talk:Rent_control_in_the_United_States/Archive_1
 * Talk:Rent_control_in_the_United_States/Archive_1
 * Talk:Rent_control_in_the_United_States
 * On the Rent regulation article, this same IP started the same type of edits on 2021-03-26T16:26:28, but did much less edit warring there.
 * Talk:Rent_regulation
 * Also see this discussion: Neutral_point_of_view/Noticeboard/Archive_89
 * Another discussion on the same topic but started by a different editor then closed when that editor was blocked for some time for an unrelated reason: Talk:Rent_regulation
 * Thanks! --- Avatar317 (talk) 20:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Daniel Case As you can see, one of the page custodians has restored the version that includes the disputed phrase, rather than the stable version that existed before the phrase was added without discussion on the talk page. Please review and decide as you see fit. I leave it to you to make up your mind about what is really going on here. 81.0.36.0 (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi @Daniel Case, thank you again for your interest on this issue, wondering whether any action is going to be taken here: see that the current version contains a non-consensual statement and a disputed phrase added without discussion on the talk page. 81.0.36.0 (talk) 12:40, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * We've discussed it for years at this point. MrOllie (talk) 12:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * with the result of no consensus, and on a sentence added to the article without being previously discussed on this page. 88.12.251.41 (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Consensus need not be unanimous, and we don't count people evading their blocks at any rate. MrOllie (talk) 20:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Deactivating as protection has expired. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:45, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rent control in the United States


text:
Seattle Rainiers

The Seattle Rainiers, originally named the Seattle Indians and also known as the Seattle Angels, were a Minor League Baseball team in Seattle, Washington, that played in the Pacific Coast League from 1903 to 1906 and 1919 to 1968. They were initially named for the indigenous Native American population of the Pacific Northwest, and changed their name after being acquired by the Rainier Brewing Company, which was in turn named for nearby Mount Rainier.

History
Along with the Los Angeles Angels, Portland Beavers, Oakland Oaks, Sacramento Solons, and San Francisco Seals the Indians were charter members of the Pacific Coast League which was founded in 1903 after the California League and the Pacific Northwest League merged. They were known in the Pacific Northwest League as the Seattle Clamdiggers. Though the team finished second in 1906, the PCL contracted from six teams to four after the season (mainly due to the failures of the Sacramento franchise). For the next 11 seasons, the Indians played in the Northwest League, at the time a Class B league.

The Indians re-entered the PCL in 1919 with Portland (which had dropped out of the league after 1917), bringing the number of teams in the league to eight. The Indians finished in last place that year, but jumped to second in 1920. In 1924, the Indians won their first PCL pennant, clinching the title on the last day of the 202-game season.

For more than a decade after their championship run, the Indians were mired in the second division year after year. In 1932, their home park, 15,000-seat Dugdale Field, burned to the ground. Located at Rainier and McClellan Streets, it had been built in 1913 when the Indians played in the Northwest League. For the next six years, the team played at Civic Stadium, featuring a playing field of hardpan dirt.

Events took a definite turn for the better in 1938 when Emil Sick, owner of Seattle's Rainier Brewing Company, bought the Indians and renamed them the Seattle Rainiers. He began construction of Sick's Stadium, a 15,000-seat facility on the site of old Dugdale Field. Sick invested in the team, and it bore results. The Rainiers finished first in 1939, 1940 and 1941. They lost the postseason series in 1939, but won pennants in 1940 and 1941. In 1942 and 1943, the Rainiers finished in third place, but did win another PCL pennant in 1942.

After a few lean years, the Rainiers won PCL flags in 1951 and 1955, the last pennants won under Sick's ownership. After the 1960 season, the team was sold to the Boston Red Sox. The Red Sox in turn sold the Rainiers to the Los Angeles/California Angels in 1965, who renamed the team the Seattle Angels, as they were known during their last four seasons.

The last hurrah for the Rainiers-turned-Angels came in 1966, when the Seattle Angels won the championship of the PCL's new Western Division (the PCL had absorbed former American Association teams in the midwestern and southwestern parts of the United States). In the playoffs, the Angels defeated the Eastern Division champion Tulsa Oilers, for Seattle's last PCL pennant.

The team's last year was 1968, in which they finished in eighth place overall. Seattle had been granted an expansion team in the American League, the ill-fated Seattle Pilots, which began play in 1969. The Pilots would last but one year in Seattle, before a bankruptcy court sold the team to a group headed by Bud Selig and were moved to Milwaukee in 1970.

The Class A Rainiers
After the Pilots left, Seattle was without professional baseball for the first time since 1900. Following a two-year void, a Sacramento man named Art Peterson bought a Class A Northwest League franchise for Seattle, named them the Rainiers and signed a deal to play in Sicks' Stadium (where the team inherited the Pilots' old offices). The Rainiers played five seasons in the NWL between 1972 and 1976 with two winning teams.

The team was a co-op operation in 1972, drawing players primarily from the San Francisco and Baltimore minor league systems. Managed by former St. Louis Cardinals pitcher Ray Washburn, the Rainiers went into a tailspin in August and finished last in the NWL North Division. The Cincinnati Reds picked up Seattle as an affiliate for the next two seasons. The Rainiers came in with two second-place showings as the team groomed future major league pitchers Manny Sarmiento, Mike Armstrong and outfielder Lynn Jones during that time, as well as manager Greg Riddoch. Peterson went the independent route for 1975 and 1976, signing his own players. One of those was outfielder Casey Sander, a Seattle native who played one season in 1975 before embarking upon an acting career, eventually landing a regular role in the longtime ABC-TV sitcom Grace Under Fire. The 1976 team had the best showing of the Rainiers' five-season run, finishing second by one game to the Portland Mavericks in the NWL's Northern Division.

On September 1, 1976, Seattle shut out Portland 2-0, with local product George Meyring winning the final professional baseball game in Sicks' Stadium.

In 1977, another American League expansion team was awarded to Seattle, the Seattle Mariners.

Affiliations
The Seattle Rainiers were affiliated with the following major league teams:

Notable Rainiers alumni
Baseball Hall of Fame alumni

 * Bob Lemon (1965–1966, MGR) Inducted, 1976

Notable alumni

 * Joe Adcock (1968, MGR) 2 x MLB All-Star
 * Joe Black (1957) 1952 NL rookie of the Year
 * Sam Bohne (originally "Sam Cohen") (1920), Major League Baseball player
 * Jim Bouton (1968) MLB All-Star
 * Tommy Bridges (1950) 6 x MLB All-Star
 * Lew Burdette (1967) 3 x MLB All-Star; 1957 World Series Most Valuable Player
 * George Burns (1933) 1926 AL Most Valuable Player
 * Tom Burgmeier (1965–1966) MLB All-Star
 * Ryne Duren (1955) 4 x MLB All-Star
 * Rollie Hemsley (1948) 5 x MLB All-Star
 * Babe Herman (1925)
 * Fred Hutchinson (1938) (1955 and 1959, MGR) MLB All-Star; 1957 MLB Manager of the Year
 * Jay Johnstone (1966–1968)
 * Jim Lonborg (1964) MLB All-Star; 1967 AL Cy Young Award
 * Peanuts Lowrey (1959) MLB All-Star
 * Jim McGlothlin (1965–1966) MLB All-Star
 * Rudy May (1966) 1980 AL ERA Leader
 * Andy Messersmith (1966, 1968) 4 x MLB All-Star
 * Claude Osteen (1958) 3 x MLB All-Star
 * Marty Pattin (1966, 1968) MLB All-Star
 * Johnny Pesky (1961–1962, MGR) MLB All-Star
 * Rico Petrocelli (1964) 2 x MLB All-Star
 * Vada Pinson (1958) 4 x MLB All-Star
 * Dick Radatz (1961) 2 x MLB All-Star
 * Dutch Ruether (1935–1936, MGR)
 * Connie Ryan (1958, MGR) MLB All-Star
 * Luke Sewell (1956, MGR) MLB All-Star
 * Rip Sewell (1933) 4 x MLB All-Star
 * Chuck Tanner (1967, MGR) Manager: 1979 World Series Champion - Pittsburgh Pirates
 * Earl Torgeson (1946)
 * Sammy White (1949) MLB All-Star
 * Maury Wills (1957) 7 x MLB All-Star; 1962 NL Most Valuable Player
 * Earl Wilson (1961)
 * Wilbur Wood (1963–1964) 3 x MLB All-Star
 * Clyde Wright (1967) MLB All-Star

Players

 * Seattle Rainiers players

Tribute
The Mariners occasionally wear Rainiers uniforms as a "1950s throwback" promotion.

In 1995, the Tacoma Tigers, the Mariners Triple-A affiliate, adopted the Rainiers name and have been using it ever since.

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

title: Seattle Rainiers


text:
Toombs

Toombs is a surname. Notable people with the name include:
 * Kenneth Toombs (1928-2008), 20th-century American academic librarian
 * Robert Toombs (1810-1885), U.S. Senator, first Secretary of State of the Confederacy and Confederate general
 * Roderick Toombs, better known as Roddy Piper (1954–2015), Canadian professional wrestler and actor
 * Rudy Toombs (c. 1914-1962), American songwriter
 * Sam Toombs (1871-1949), Australian politician

title: Toombs


text: User talk:61.247.247.149

title: User talk:61.247.247.149


text:
Terry Knight

Terry Knight (born Richard Terrance Knapp; April 9, 1943 – November 1, 2004) was an American rock and roll music producer, promoter, singer, songwriter and radio personality, who enjoyed some success in radio, modest success as a singer, but considerable success as the original manager-producer for Grand Funk Railroad and the producer for Bloodrock.

Early career
Knight was born in Lapeer, Michigan, United States. After graduating from high school in 1961, he briefly attended Alma College before dropping out. Knight's music career began as a DJ at the Top 40 rock station WTAC in Flint, Michigan, then going to Detroit in 1963 where he replaced Dave Shafer as "Jack the Bellboy" on WJBK. The following year, he moved across the river to CKLW in Windsor, Ontario. One of the first American DJs to air the Rolling Stones, he hosted a late night show from high-powered CKLW, bringing the British Invasion to the Northern states. He was awarded the honorary title of "The Sixth Stone" for his early support of the Stones. By the end of 1964, however, Knight had left CKLW and the radio business, intending to pursue his own career in music.

Around 1965, Knight fashioned a songwriting and performing career in Flint by becoming the front man for Terry Knight and the Pack. With this band, Knight recorded a handful of regional hits for Lucky Eleven Records, part of the Cameo-Parkway Records group, including his self-penned generation gap anthem "A Change On the Way", and scored two national hits, a cover of the Yardbirds' "(You're a) Better Man Than I", and his ultra-lounge reading of Ben E. King's "I (Who Have Nothing)", which peaked at No. 46 nationally. The band left three garage rock classics before breaking up in 1967. Brownsville Station honored Knight and the Pack with a cover of the Knight-penned "Love, Love, Love, Love, Love" on their 1973 album Yeah!

Producer and solo career
In 1967 Knight moved to New York City, and attempted a solo career as a singer and staff producer with the Cameo-Parkway label, with limited success. He produced and wrote a handful of tracks by other artists, including garage band Question Mark & the Mysterians, and the easy-listening International Pop Orchestra. He also scored music for the 20th Century Fox noir film, The Incident (1967).

Knight traveled to London in 1968, hoping to become a recording artist or producer for the Beatles' newly formed Apple Records. Knight met Paul McCartney and was present at some of the recording sessions for the band's 1968 double album The Beatles (also known as the "White Album"), including the session when Ringo Starr temporarily quit the group. Knight was surprised to find the band members arguing with each other. He soon left London after he was unable to negotiate a contract with acceptable terms.

"Saint Paul"
In early 1969, Knight secured a producer's contract with Capitol Records which also allowed him to release his own songs as a solo artist. He wrote and recorded a single, "Saint Paul", which may have contributed to the "Paul is dead" theory that erupted late in the year. The cryptic lyrics of the song are generally thought to allude to Knight's failed relationship with McCartney and his apparent belief that the Beatles would soon break up. The lyrics do not refer to death, but were interpreted by some fans as containing clues. The ending repeats the phrase "hey Paul" in an arrangement that sounds similar to the Beatles' song "Hey Jude". There are two versions, both in stereo. The full five-minute version contains a high-pitched voice singing lines from Beatles songs, including "Hello, Goodbye", "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" and "She Loves You", while the four-minute edit does not contain additional song excerpts.

Initial copies of the single listed Knight's company Storybook Music as the publisher of "Saint Paul". After Capitol received a cease and desist letter from the Beatles' music publisher, Maclen Music (the U.S. division of Northern Songs), the record was pulled from distribution.

A deal was then worked out between Knight and Maclen Music. About a month later, in May 1969, "Saint Paul" was reissued with a publishing credit by Maclen. The second pressing of the record also contained a note on the label that stated that "Hey Jude" was "used by permission". The reassignment of the publishing rights made Knights' song the only non Lennon–McCartney tune owned by Maclen. "Saint Paul" reached the top 40 in some cities in the upper Midwest region but failed to make the Billboard Hot 100 national chart. The fact that "Saint Paul" was re-published by Maclen was seen by some Beatle fans as evidence of a conspiracy involving Knight, the Beatles and the "Paul is dead" rumor.

"Saint Paul" was re-recorded in 1969 by New Zealand singer Shane and became one of the best-selling singles of the 1960s in that country. In the early 1990s author Andru Reeve repeatedly tried to interview Knight while writing a book about the "Paul is dead" theory. Reeve was unable to get Knight to talk about the song.

Grand Funk Railroad
Still working as a producer with Capitol, Knight renewed his connection with two former Pack members, guitarist Mark Farner and drummer Don Brewer. Knight encouraged the two to add a new bass player and become a "power trio" along the lines of Cream. The group quickly added former Mysterians bassist Mel Schacher and changed their name to 'Grand Funk Railroad'. While becoming their manager-producer, Knight helped steer the trio to international fame, beginning with his getting them onto the bill—for free—at the 1969 Atlanta Pop Festival. This live performance convinced Capitol to sign the trio. For the next two years, Grand Funk Railroad became the most popular rock attraction in the United States despite mixed critical reviews that Knight exploited as part of their appeal; he also discovered and produced the Fort Worth, Texas group Bloodrock, who hit the Top 40 in early 1971 with the unlikely death anthem "D.O.A. (Dead On Arrival)".

Between Grand Funk and Bloodrock, Knight racked up an unprecedented eight gold albums while simultaneously waging a war of words with Rolling Stone over the magazine's frequent pannings of the two acts. But by early 1972, both Grand Funk and Bloodrock had severed their professional relations with Knight. In Grand Funk's case, it involved court actions that kept the band tied up for almost two full years; they had demanded full royalty accounting and accused Knight of double-dipping as manager-producer, while the trio had not been getting all the monies they had earned. For his part, Knight would claim the band had had only three months left on their contract with him when they first took him to court, and could have been free with half the legal aggravation; the trio ultimately won their separation from Knight but at heavy cost, before adding keyboard player Craig Frost and continuing a successful recording and touring career through 1976.

Life after Grand Funk
Knight was also dropped from Capitol soon after the Grand Funk court actions were resolved and began his own label, Brown Bag Records, releasing albums and singles by Mom's Apple Pie, John Hambrick, Wild Cherry and Faith Band. None of them found commercial success and, in late 1973, Knight retired permanently from show business. He associated with super model Twiggy and raced cars with film star Paul Newman in the mid-1970s before becoming addicted to cocaine, which consumed him. By the 1980s he had straightened himself out, settling in Yuma, Arizona with his daughter Danielle. He melded into the community working in advertising sales for a weekly newspaper.

Death
On November 1, 2004, Terry Knight was murdered at the age of 61. He was stabbed multiple times by his teenage daughter's boyfriend Donald A. Fair in their shared apartment in Temple, Texas, after Knight attempted to intercede in an argument over Fair's use of methamphetamine. Fair claimed he was high on methamphetamine at the time of the killing, in an attempt to mitigate his sentence. Fair was sentenced on May 26, 2005, to life in prison. Terry Knight was cremated and buried in a family plot in Lapeer, Michigan. He is survived by daughter, Danielle. Four years after his death, Terry Knight and The Pack were voted into the Michigan Rock and Roll Legends online Hall of Fame.

Singles

 * The Bossmen - Baby Boy/You And I (1966)
 * The Debutantes - Love Is Strange/A New Love Today (1966)
 * The Rites Of Spring - Why (?)/Comin' On Back To Me (1966)
 * Dandy Dan - If Love Is/(I Don't Stand) A Ghost Of A Chance'' (1967)
 * The Jayhawkers - Come On (Children)/A Certain Girl (1967)
 * Sir Cedric Smith - Until It's Time For You To Go/To Sing For You (1967)
 * Barry Drake - Roll On River (1971)
 * Barry Drake - I Won't Be Reconstructed (1971)

Albums

 * Terry Knight & The Pack - Terry Knight and the Pack (1966)
 * Terry Knight & The Pack - Reflections (1967)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - On Time (1969)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - Grand Funk (1969)
 * Bloodrock - Bloodrock (1970)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - Closer to Home (1970)
 * Bloodrock - Bloodrock 2 (1970)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - Live Album (1970)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - Survival (1971)
 * Bloodrock - Bloodrock 3 (1971)
 * Grand Funk Railroad - E Pluribus Funk (1971)
 * John Hambrick - Windmill In A Jet Filled Sky (1972)

title: Terry Knight


text:
Crawdaddy (magazine)

Crawdaddy was an American rock music magazine launched in 1966. It was created by Paul Williams, a Swarthmore College student at the time, in response to the increasing sophistication and cultural influence of popular music. The magazine was named after the Crawdaddy Club in London and published during its early years as Crawdaddy! (with an exclamation point).

Preceding both Rolling Stone and Creem, Crawdaddy was the training ground for many rock writers just finding the language to describe rock and roll, which was only then beginning to be written about as studiously as folk music and jazz. According to The New York Times, Crawdaddy was "the first magazine to take rock and roll seriously", while Rolling Stone acknowledged it as "the first serious publication devoted to rock & roll news and criticism". The magazine spawned the career of numerous rock and other writers. Early contributors included Jon Landau, Sandy Pearlman, Richard Meltzer and Peter Knobler.

After Williams left Crawdaddy in 1968, the magazine was edited by Knobler from 1972 until its last issue in 1979. From 1993 to 2003 Williams self-published a Crawdaddy reincarnation. In 2006 it was sold to Wolfgang's Vault and later resurrected as a daily webzine. Effective August 5, 2011, visits began redirecting to the music website Paste, which announced that Crawdaddy "relaunches as a blog on Paste, where we'll share stories from the Crawdaddy archives and publish new content on legacy artists".

Fanzine roots
Named after the legendary Crawdaddy Club in England at which the Rolling Stones played their first gig, Crawdaddy was started on the campus of Swarthmore College. Williams was a science fiction fan who at the age of 17 started mimeographing and distributing a collection of criticisms (at first mostly his own) about rock and roll music and musicians. (He had begun publishing a science fiction fanzine, Within, at the age of 14, and later recruited some of his fellow fans to help.) Crawdaddy quickly moved from its fanzine roots (the first issue was mimeographed by fellow fan Ted White) to become one of the first rock music "prozines", with newsstand distribution.

Mass market magazine
Crawdaddy briefly suspended publication in 1969, then returned, with its title unpunctuated, in 1970, as a monthly with national mass market distribution, first as a quarter-fold newsprint tabloid, then as a standard-sized magazine. Crawdaddy continued through the decade, led by editor-in-chief Peter Knobler (who first wrote for the original Crawdaddy under Williams in October 1968), with senior editor Greg Mitchell, featuring contributions from Joseph Heller, John Lennon, Tim O'Brien, Michael Herr, Gilda Radner, Dan Aykroyd, P.J. O'Rourke and Cameron Crowe, plus a roster of columnists including at times William S. Burroughs, Paul Krassner, David G. Hartwell, the Firesign Theater, and sometimes Paul Williams himself. While on the run from the law, Abbie Hoffman was Crawdaddy's travel editor.

As the decade progressed, the Crawdaddy staff included Timothy White (later, an editor of Billboard), Mitch Glazer, Denis Boyles, Noe Goldwasser, John Swenson, and Jon Pareles, plus notable freelance photographers including David Gahr, Francesco Scavullo, and Ed Gallucci. Because of such notable talent, Crawdaddy has been described as the Buffalo Springfield of the rock magazine world.

Crawdaddy was a generational magazine known for its well-written, insightful profiles, particularly of musicians, but also a diverse mix of filmmakers, athletes, politicians, comedians, and other celebrities prominent in 1970s pop culture, including Sly Stone, Bob Marley, The Who, Eric Clapton, the Rolling Stones, Mel Brooks, John Belushi, Jack Nicholson, Gregg Allman, Muhammad Ali, Joni Mitchell, Bonnie Raitt, Linda Ronstadt, Roxy Music, Little Feat, George Carlin, Randy Newman, Paul Butterfield, Brian Eno and Roy Orbison. Under Knobler, Crawdaddys editors often assigned artists to write about other artists; Al Kooper profiled Steve Martin, Martin Mull interviewed Woody Allen, William S. Burroughs talked magic, mysticism and Aleister Crowley with Jimmy Page.

The magazine's record reviews, capsule reviews, and film reviews sections, driven by editors Goldwasser and Swenson, shared an iconoclastic reputation that was well-known by the music and film industries for its fierce independence.

Crawdaddys features section regularly covered scenes from New Orleans funk to Austin, Texas' cosmic cowboys to Scientology, est and disco. Its renowned sense of humor produced the Crawdoodah Gazette, The Whole Earth Conspiracy Catalogue, and "The Assassination Please Almanac".

In 1976 the magazine published the first in-depth article on the life and bizarre death of country-rock pioneer Gram Parsons, anticipating the wealth of information published about him in later years. Greg Mitchell, who wrote that piece, went on to write various books concerning U.S. political events.

Discovers Bruce Springsteen
Among Crawdaddys scoops: the first major profile of Bruce Springsteen, written in December 1972 by Peter Knobler with special assistance from Greg Mitchell. "He sings with a freshness and urgency I haven't heard since I was rocked by 'Like a Rolling Stone,'" Knobler wrote. Knobler's Crawdaddy discovered Springsteen in the rock press and was his earliest champion. Springsteen and the E Street Band acknowledged by giving a private performance at the Crawdaddy 10th Anniversary Party in New York City in June 1976. Knobler profiled Springsteen in 1973, 1975 and 1978.

Rename and closure
Under Peter Knobler's editorship from 1972 to 1979, Crawdaddys focus expanded to cover more general aspects of popular culture, particularly politics, sports and movies, and in 1979 the magazine changed its title to Feature. When the music business retrenched, Feature lost much of its advertising revenue, and after five issues at the beginning of 1979 it ceased publication. Knobler went on to collaborate on numerous best-selling books, including the political memoir All's Fair by James Carville and Mary Matalin and the autobiographies of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Hakeem Olajuwon, Governor Ann Richards, NYPD Commissioner William Bratton, Sumner Redstone, NYC Mayor David Dinkins, Donny Deutsch, and Tommy Hilfiger.

Later relaunches
Paul Williams reclaimed the punctuated title in 1993, publishing 28 issues until financial pressures forced him to end its run in 2003. In 2006 Williams sold the rights to the Crawdaddy name as well as all of his published works in back issues and a handful of his authored books to Wolfgang's Vault. In May 2007, the magazine was re-launched as an online publication at Crawdaddy.com, equipped with video and MP3 capability. Credited for its reputation for "thinking man's music writing" by Magnet, Crawdaddy operated as a daily music news blog and source for longform music journalism, with a team of freelancers spanning the globe and a small San Francisco-based editorial staff headed by Editor-in-Chief Angela Zimmerman, who succeeded Jocelyn Hoppa. At the film, music and culture website PasteMagazine.com, where Crawdaddy appeared as a blog on August 5, 2011, the host site undertakes to import and maintain the Crawdaddy archive, and promises to continue to post not only archival but new material from "many of the columnists and writers you might have enjoyed at the Crawdaddy website".

The magazine's content spanned the entire age of rock 'n' roll from its inception (and all of the genre's derivatives) to extensive coverage on new and breaking bands. Regular columns and features included interviews, reviews, song histories, lyrical dissections, interviews on songwriting, roadie tales courtesy of Dinky Dawson, new classics, music and politics, crate diggers, the weakest cut, memoir and fiction pieces, in-house video sessions and interviews, and more.

Very Seventies
Peter Knobler and Greg Mitchell edited the book Very Seventies: A Cultural History of the 1970s from the Pages of Crawdaddy, published in 1995.

In popular culture
In the 1979 movie Rock 'n' Roll High School, the character Riff Randell (P. J. Soles) is seen reading an issue.

The Simpsons episode "A Midsummer's Nice Dream" (season 22, episode 16; airdate March 13, 2011) features a scene with Homer in the attic reminiscing to Bart about the 1970s, while sitting amongst stacks of old Crawdaddy magazines.

The magazine has been also referenced by Mystery Science Theater 3000, such as in the episode "The Skydivers" (in a gag about a reporter "covering the event" for Crawdaddy, although the movie predates the founding of the magazine) and the episode "The Incredible Melting Man" (in a gag about a very 1970s woman having a collection of back issues).

title: Crawdaddy (magazine)


text:
General Motors GMT platform

GMT (General Motors Truck) is a nomenclature used by General Motors to designate multiple vehicle platforms. In use since the early 1980s, the GMT nomenclature is used for light trucks, full-size SUVs, and vans, along with several medium-duty trucks. With only a few exceptions, nearly all GMT vehicles use body-on-frame construction, along with rear-wheel drive (or all-wheel drive) powertrain configurations.

Primary applications
Primary applications of the platform – those that are equivalent in basic RWD/frame structure to each other – existed from 1981 to 1989, and again since 2018.

Light trucks and SUVs
Pickups and SUVs have been the main vehicles underpinned by GMT platforms, being involved for the entirety of the platform's existence.

Fullsize

 * 1) GMT400 – Chevrolet C/K and variants, 1988 – 2002
 * 2) GMT800 – Chevrolet Silverado and variants, 1999 – 2007
 * 3) GMT900 – Chevrolet Silverado and variants, 2007 – 2014
 * 4) GMTK2XX – Chevrolet Silverado and variants, 2014 – 2019
 * 5) GMTT1XX – Chevrolet Silverado and variants, 2019–present

Midsize

 * 1) GMT325 – Chevrolet S-10 and truck rebadgings, 1982 – 2012
 * 2) GMT330 – Chevrolet S-10 Blazer and SUV rebadgings, 1983 – 2012
 * 3) GMT355 – First-gen. Chevrolet Colorado and truck rebadgings, 2004 – 2012
 * 4) GMT360 – Chevrolet TrailBlazer and rebadgings, 2002 – 2009
 * 5) GMT700, later GMT31XX – Second-gen. Chevrolet Colorado, 2012–present
 * 6) GMT700, later GMT31XX – Second-gen. Chevrolet TrailBlazer SUV, 2012–present

Hummer
In contrast to the Hummer H1–designed and assembled by AM General, the Hummer H2 and Hummer H3 were developed by GM, receiving their own platform designations. Designated the GMT825, the H2 was derived from the GMT820 (Chevrolet Tahoe/GMC Yukon), with its own midsection frame design and a rear frame shared with the 2500-series GMT800 pickup trucks.

The H3 SUV was designated the GMT345, a close variant of the GMT355 (Chevrolet Colorado/GMC Canyon). The 2009-2010 H3T pickup truck was designated as the GMT745, adopting a nomenclature closer in line with the GMT700 used by the later second-generation Colorado/Canyon.

Vans
The 1996 Chevrolet Express/GMC Savana replaced the previous G-series Van/Vandura, adopting the GMT600 designation. As part of a model update and revision for 2003, GM changed the Express/Savana to GMT610, which remains in use, the model line competes with the Ford Transit, and Ford E-Series (dependent on configuration), Mercedes-Benz/Freightliner Sprinter, Dodge Ram Wagon, and the Ram ProMaster (cargo van only).

Medium trucks
For 1990, the Chevrolet Kodiak/GMC TopKick medium-duty trucks adopted the GMT530 designation (sharing the cab of the GMT400 trucks). For 2003, the line was redesigned, becoming the GMT560 platform (sharing a version of the GMT610 cab). After the 2009 model year, General Motors ended medium-duty truck production.

Since 2018, a medium-duty version of the GMTK2XX has been produced in a joint venture with Navistar International.

Other applications
While the aforementioned platforms are the ones model commonly referred to as GMT platforms, there have been other instances of the name being applied which are not for RWD and/or body-on-frame vehicles.

MPVs
For 1990, GM unveiled its first minivans, all of which were underpinned by the first generation of the U platform. This platform was given the alternate name of GMT199 shortly thereafter, beginning the pattern of expanded use for the GMT platform name. This pattern was kept for the 1996 second-generation and 2005 third-generation GM minivans, called the GMT200 and GMT201 platforms, respectively. With the 2010 introduction of the fourth-generation U platform, the designation GMT510 was planned for use. However, all of the GM minivans (save for the China-exclusive Buick GL8) were dropped, ergo the name went unused.

For its production from 2006 to 2011, the compact wagon-bodied Chevrolet HHR rode on the Delta platform. Despite this, it was internally given the designation of GMT001.

Crossovers
In 2001 and 2002, the Pontiac Aztek and Buick Rendezvous were introduced, respectively. These were built upon a shortened version of the U platform which underpinned GM's minivans. As such, they were given the GMT 250 and GMT 257 names respectively. For 2003, Cadillac released their first crossover, the Sigma-based first-generation SRX. Being a luxury model, it was given the alternate platform code of GMT265. The successive generation SRX, on an entirely different platform, was called GMT166. The related Saab 9-4X was called GMT168.

In 2004, with the release of the first-generation Chevrolet Equinox, the GMT 191 name was internally used to refer to it. Consequently, the GMT190 name was retroactively applied to the second-generation Chevrolet Tracker, which could be considered one of the Equinox's predecessors. GMT192 was used to refer to the Pontiac Torrent, which was released a year later. The next application of this platform was called GMT193, used exclusively for the second-generation Suzuki XL7, which was discontinued in 2009. The 2010 second-generation Chevrolet Equinox, was called GMT172. The related GMC Terrain was called GMT177. In 2017, the third-generation Equinox went on sale, though it did not use an alternate GMT designation for its platform, and simply used the latest Delta platform variant D2XX. This decision, along with the equivalent shifts for the Enclave and Traverse models in the same year, made for the end of the use of GMT-platform designations for models that are not RWD and body-on-frame.

For 2007, the release of the new Saturn Outlook and GMC Acadia, as well as the Lambda platform, occurred. Lambda itself was called the GMT960 series, with each individual vehicle it underpinned getting an alternate GMT-designation as well. The Outlook was given GMT966, and the Acadia GMT968. The next year, the Buick Enclave and Chevrolet Traverse were introduced, and given GMT967 and GMT561, respectively. Despite numerical similarity in nomenclature of these platforms to the GMT900/GMT560 platforms, there was no further relation, as these models were actually more similar to the other GM crossover platforms.

title: General Motors GMT platform


text:
Brychan

Brychan Brycheiniog was a legendary 5th-century king of Brycheiniog (Brecknockshire, alternatively Breconshire) in Mid Wales.

Name variations
Brychan had Irish ancestry and came from Ireland to Wales, therefore his original name was likely to have been Irish prior to his being called Brychan which is of Welsh etymology. In some sources he is called Brocanus which is the latinized version of the Irish name Broccan. He is also sometimes referred to as Braccan, Brachan, Brecin and Breccan.

Life
According to Celtic hagiography Brychan was born in Ireland, the son of a Prince Anlach, son of Coronac, and his wife, Marchel, heiress of the Welsh kingdom of Garthmadrun (Brycheiniog), which the couple later inherited. Upon his father's death, he returned to Garthmadrun and changed its name to Brycheiniog. Brychan's name may be a Welsh version of the Irish name Broccán and that of his grandfather Coronac may represent Cormac. Brychan's education was entrusted to one Drichan.

The Life of St. Cadoc by Lifris (c. 1100) portrays Brychan fighting Arthur, Cai and Bedivere because of King Gwynllyw of Gwynllwg's abduction of his daughter St. Gwladys from his court in Talgarth.

Portraiture and veneration
He is occasionally described as an undocumented saint but the traditional literature does not call him a saint, referring to him as a patriarch instead, and he has no churches named for him. A 15th-century stained glass window in the parish church at St Neot in Cornwall, supposedly depicts Brychan, seated and crowned, holding in his arms eleven children. This, however, has been described by a standard modern guide as "God with Souls in his lap". He is given a saint day on 6 April.

Children of Brychan
According to Christian tradition, Brychan was married three times – to Prawst ferch Tydwal, Banhadlwedd ferch Banadi, and Gwladys – and had a very large family. These wives are mentioned in several manuscripts, including those by William Worcester, John Leland, and Nicholas Roscarrock. The number of children attributed to him varies from twelve to sixty-three, the number most frequently encountered being twenty-four. There are two main lists however, one of Welsh origin and one of Cornish origin. Most of his children appear to have travelled from Brecon to evangelise Cornwall and North Devon, where they are now venerated, but there is little agreement between the two lists.

The number of Brychan's children may have grown over time, as more and more secular people as well as saints wished to claim descent from one of the "Holy Families of Britain". Listed below are children from Welsh, Cornish, Irish, and Breton sources:

Sons in Welsh sources
The sons listed in the Cognacio Brychan, De Situ Brecheniauc and the genealogies of Jesus College MS 20 are Cynog, Rhain Dremrudd, Clydwyn, Arthen, Papai, Dingad, Berwyn and Rhydog. Also listed, but not in all three, are Cynon, Pasgen, Cylflifer, Marthaerun and Rhun. Other Welsh sources claim the following additional sons: Caian, Cynbryd, Cynfran, Cynin, Dogfan, Dyfnan, Dyfrig, Hychan, Llecheu, Neffei, Rhawin, Llofan, Llonio, Heilin, Afallach and Gwynnws.

Daughters in Welsh sources
The De Situ Brecheniauc lists: Meleri, Hunydd, Gwladys, Ceingar, Tudglid, Nyfain, Gwawr, Marchell, Lluan, Gwrygon Goddeu, Arianwen, Bethan, Ceinwen (Keyne), Cerddych, Clydai, Cynheiddon (identified with Saint Endelienta), Dwynwen, Eiliwedd, Goleudydd, Gwen, Lludd, Tudful, Tudwystl and Tybie. Other Welsh sources claim the following additional daughters: Beiol (Bilo), Tydieu, Eufail, Hawystl, Edwen, Gwenrhiw, Tudwen, Callwen, Gwenfyl, Gwennan and Mwynwen.

Descendants in Cornish sources
Listed in the Life of Saint Nectan are, by his wife, Gwladys: Adwen, Canauc (Cynog), Cleder (Clether), Dilic (Illick), Endelient (Endelienta), Helie, Johannes (Sion), Iona, Juliana (Ilud), Kenhender (Cynidr), Keri (Curig), Mabon (Mabyn), Menfre (Menefrewy), Merewenne (Marwenna), Morewenna (Morwenna), Nectanus (Nectan), Tamalanc, Tedda (Tetha), Wencu (Gwencuff, Gwengustle, name of Saint Nennocha), Wenheden (Enoder), Wenna (Gwen), Wensent, Wynup (Gwenabwy) and Yse (Issey).

Of the holy children that settled in Cornwall, the following gave their names to Cornish churches:

 * 1) Endelient at St Endellion
 * 2) Menfre at St Minver
 * 3) Tethe at St Teath
 * 4) Mabon at St Mabyn
 * 5) Merewenne at Marhamchurch
 * 6) Wenna at St Wenn
 * 7) Keyne at St Keyne
 * 8) Yse at St Issey
 * 9) Morwenna at Morwenstow
 * 10) Cleder at St Clether
 * 11) Keri at Egloskerry
 * 12) Helie at Egloshayle
 * 13) Adwen at Advent
 * 14) Lanent at Lelant

Irish sources
The Book of Leinster lists the following sons by Brychan's wife, Dína daughter of the King of the Saxons: Mo-Goróc, Mo-Chonóc (Cynog), Diraid, Dubán (Dyfnan), Cairinne (Caian), Cairpre, Iast, Ellóc (Dilic), Paan, Cáemán and Mo-Beóc.

Breton sources
Breton tradition says that Brychan married Menedoc daughter of Constantine, King of the Scots. Together they were the parents of Saint Nennocha.

title: Brychan


text: User talk:203.200.144.24

title: User talk:203.200.144.24


text:
Talk:Dulce bellum inexpertis

I put this in the Latin phrases article. It should be deleted as an independent article. Putting it in the wiktionary is also a good idea. alteripse 05:18, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dulce bellum inexpertis


text:
Talk:Victorian Certificate of Education

I removed a link to two Christian Colleges in the "high performing schools" part and left MacRob, MHS and Bialik College there. The referenced article did not mention the removed schools at all and hence seems to be an attempt to plug the school. Ledward (talk) 06:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

It is worth noting that students in the ninth and tenth years (in the Victorian/NSW sense, with a "Prep" grade before 1, so the 10th and 11th years) can study a single VCE unit per semester to increase their score.
 * Feel free to add this information yourself. TPK 07:04, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think that they actually count towards your score do they, because I did a VCE subject in year 10 and on my statement of results last year for my yr12 subjects it made no mention of it --60.224.14.194 03:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC) --- I feel that some aspects of this page contain errors or perhaps misplaced opinions. There also possible relevant additions and expansions that the article might require but I haven't examined them here. The revisions are these listed in the sections in which they occur in the article:

Introduction

 * Students do not neccessarily have to complete Year 11, eg. international students can study for and gain their VCE just by completing 5 or 6 3/4 subjects in year 12.
 * There seems to be no authority for the statement that the VCE is "one of the more rigorous education programs in the world". If there is authority perhaps it should be added, if not perhaps this statement should be removed as it constitutes a POV.

The VCE Structure

 * I feel this section could do with some structural revision, as this section contains most of the factual content of the article. Perhaps a subdivision like Subjects/Assessment/Moderation would be appropriate.
 * I believe the discussion of the statistical moderation of SACs is incorrect. Instead I think they make the mean and quartiles of the SAC marks equal to the mean and quartiles of the exam marks and in so doing fit students in according to their relative positions on the original SAC assessment. This means that outliers do not effect the outcome so much. Information to this effect can be found on the VCAA website.
 * The VCE is not accepted for admission into universities worldwide. It is at best only considered year 11 (AS Level) education in the UK under a certain ENTER score.

Criticisms
Orizon 7 July 2005 06:15 (UTC)
 * Given the revision of how internal assessment is moderated I think the first part of this section is perhaps less valid. In any case, further adjustment of the moderation process might render the SAC marks meaningless (the article does seem to support the view that SAC marks should just be moderated to match student's exam performance which would essentially render SAC marks inconsequential).
 * The comment that the VCE is advantageous to girls on the basis of their superior ability in English seems to me to be a prejudiced statement. Although there is statistical evidence to suggest that girls do better in the VCE (I'm not sure where the statistics are from); I know of no evidence which suggests they do much better at english than they do in other subjects and I doubt it exists. Also, the maths and science subjects in the VCE are marked up far more than the humanities subjects which would presumably in the opinion of the article as it is currently written aid boys in the VCE

 * I agree. This article may need a tag for cleanup ;o --coblin 10:00, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * ...three months later. Yes, there's quite a bit to do. I'm not desperate to do it. But maybe in a month or so. After exams and what not. -orizon 11:37, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
 * http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/subjectstats.html shows that girls do substantially better at english then boys. This, together with much other evidence from other sources suggesting that girls do better at English than boys in general, can be a large criticism of the VCE. English, being the only compulsory subject and which MUST be counted when calculating an ENTER score, could be seen as very disadvantagous to boys studying the VCE. One possible suggestion would be to remove the compulsory status of English, thereby making it fair and completely elective. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.255.66 (talk • contribs) 23:23, 31 October 2006

Leon... 10:32, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The section explaining moderation needs to describe the moderation process better, as scaling of different subjects (also possibly able to come under the heading "statistical moderation") has come under attack as well as the process which comes up with absolute SAC marks

Criticisms revamped (still needs cleanup - wikify)
Criticisms was cleared of what I believe was a POV. (The first line in the original implied that the VCE is near-perfect)

It still needs to be cleaned up. I do think of the girls/boys argument as a very very very unsupported fact, and there is hardly any evidence to show that is true. I think it should be removed. --coblin 09:59, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

 * http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/statistics/subjectstats.html shows that girls do substantially better at english then boys. This, together with much other evidence from other sources suggesting that girls do better at English than boys in general, can be a large criticism of the VCE. English, being the only compulsory subject and which MUST be counted when calculating an ENTER score, could be seen as very disadvantagous to boys studying the VCE. One possible suggestion would be to remove the compulsory status of English, thereby making it fair and completely elective.

VCE wiki-linked
Why is almost every occurance of "VCE" wiki-linked in this article? The article is about VCE! — Daniel15 ( Talk/Contribs ) 04:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like this has been fixed :) -- Daniel15 ( Talk/Contribs ) 06:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Vcaa banner logo.gif
Image:Vcaa banner logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:53, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

HSC deserves mention in article
I would have liked to see a bit more of the history of the VCE in this article. For example, the year it replaced the HSC (1990 I believe?), the reasons for the change, and so forth. This belongs in the first or second paragraph. A few sentences even would suffice. Can someone do this? Davez621 (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

 * I found this reference from the Victoria Public Records Office, although sadly it doesn't say very much about the qualification. I've added a sentence about it the introduction anyway, and will do the same at Higher School Certificate. One thing I haven't been able to establish, however, is whether the Victorian HSC and the New South Wales HSC were separate qualifications awarded by different bodies or one and the same. Hopefully someone else will know. TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:48, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Apparently they're different so I've made the necessary changes to reflect that. TheRetroGuy (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Have now created Higher School Certificate (Victoria). TheRetroGuy (talk) 11:42, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority.png
The image Image:Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --05:39, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Links to related resources
I propose that either or both of the following links be added to this article:

a) Link to www.topscores.info in the Resources section

b) Link to Bored of Studies in Wikipedia, or to www.boredofstudies.org as a "See Also"

Rationale. The rationale for the additions is taken from Wikipedia guidelines:

a) www.topscores.info

1. It contains "neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to .... amount of detail"

2. It is a site "with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article"

3. It is a site that "...contain[s] information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources."

4. It is consistent with other links already present in the article.

b) Bored of Studies page (or to www.boredofstudies.org)

1. It is a site "with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article"

2. It is consistent with other links already present in the article.

3. Its suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia is well established.

Rebuttal. The rebuttal to the negative case is:

"Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." Both sites meet this requirement by hosting substantial information stores well beyond the scope of any article.

"Links mainly intended to promote a website." The links are intended purely to add value to the Wikipedia topic in question. No promotional motivation is involved.

"Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Yahoo! Groups), USENET newsgroups or e-mail lists.". Bored of Studies contains a discussion forum as only one of its many functions. It is not a social networking site. The guideline does not apply to www.topscores.info.

"Links to blogs and personal web pages". Does not apply.

"Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article." Bored of Studies is relevant by its coverage of course structure, subjects and UAIs/ENTERs. www.topscores.info is relevant by covering assessment outcomes and awards, both of which are outlined briefly within the Wikipedia article itself.

Request. My previous edits along these lines have been reverted by one individual Wikipedia editor in particular. This is a call for a consensus from the Wikipedia community on the issue. Independent views from third parties are welcomed.

Nilmania (talk) 05:13, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Tables
I think the two tables would look better if they were side-by-side or left/right aligned

Darklight Shadows 20:39, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Feel free to comment here:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 October 22. -  C HAMPION  (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Victorian Certificate of Education. 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/20070719003707/http://ajte.education.ecu.edu.au/ISSUES/PDF/252/Brew.pdf to http://ajte.education.ecu.edu.au/ISSUES/PDF/252/Brew.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090919050637/http://www.access.prov.vic.gov.au/public/component/daPublicBaseContainer?component=daViewGroup&entityId=24 to http://www.access.prov.vic.gov.au/public/component/daPublicBaseContainer?component=daViewGroup&entityId=24
 * Added tag to http://www.quppa.net/studyscores/

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) 04:48, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Subjects that a lawyer does
Now list them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A03:2880:32FF:3:0:0:FACE:B00C (talk) 14:20, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * This is not the place to do that. HiLo48 (talk) 00:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Unscored and scored VETs not distinguished
There is a large difference between unscored VETs (which will count as an increment of 10% of the fourth subject in your primary 4 regardless of what you score in them) and scored VET subjects (which are scored as any normal subject would be). These are all in one big table together with nothing mentioning the difference Abennyec (talk) 08:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If you have good knowledge of how it all works, and have references, feel free to add to the article yourself. HiLo48 (talk) 09:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply is it ok to use primary sources for this https://vtac.edu.au/files/pdf/reports/scaling-report-23-24.pdf has a list of VET subjects that could count as primary 4 for ATAR (at least this year). https://vtac.edu.au/atar-scaling-guide-2025.html explains the difference (under VCE VET studies). On the pages for individual unscored VET subjects they are listed as unscored (eg: https://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/curriculum/vet/vce-vet-programs/Pages/appliedlanguage.aspx under ATAR contribution) however i do not have a comprehensive list of unscored VETs and VTAC could change which ones are scored and unscored. Seems to be not well documented in general. Thanks for your time Abennyec (talk) 11:49, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Victorian Certificate of Education


text:
Edwin P. Wilson

Edwin Paul Wilson (May 3, 1928 – September 10, 2012) was a former CIA and Office of Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. It was later found that the United States Department of Justice had relied on a false affidavit when prosecuting Wilson; as a result, Wilson's convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year.

Early life
Edwin P. Wilson was born to a poor farming family in Nampa, Idaho, in 1928. He first worked as a merchant seaman. In 1953, Wilson earned a psychology degree from the University of Portland. That same year, Wilson joined the Marines and fought in the last days of the Korean War. He was said to have been impressive during his military service and, when he was discharged in 1956 for a knee injury, went to work for the Central Intelligence Agency.

CIA career
Wilson's first assignments were for the Office of Security; this included a stint in 1956 guarding U-2 spy planes in Turkey. In 1960, the Agency sent him to Cornell University for graduate studies in labor relations. He put this and his knowledge of psychology to use in the Agency's International Organizations Division (IOD) tackling communism in trade unions around the world. Wilson was involved in attempts to destabilize European labor unions, for example, by using methods as diverse as involving Corsican mobsters and using plagues of cockroaches.

"'Wilson was on the CIA's payroll, and doing the agency's bidding, all the time he was employed by one of the largest labor unions in the United States as its international representative in Europe. He served as an advance man for Hubert H. Humphrey in the 1964 campaign, thus playing an active role in partisan politics, while still working for the CIA.'"

However, Wilson's most valuable time for the CIA was in Special Operations Division (SOD) setting up front companies like Maritime Consulting Associates (1964) and Consultants International (1965), which were used to covertly ship supplies around the world. For example, cargoes included disassembled boats sent to central Africa where they were welded together on the shores of Lake Tanganyika and used to intercept Soviet arms being ferried across the lake to rebels in the Congo; arms to Angola; crowd-control gear to Chile, Brazil and Venezuela; all kinds of equipment for intelligence-gathering facilities in Iran; supplies for a group of dissident army officers planning a coup in Indonesia; and barges sent to Vietnam. As director of these firms, which were conducted as legitimate businesses, Wilson began to amass a lot of money, but as a contractor, not an employee. He invested in property around the world. In 1971, after 15 years with the CIA, events that have been disputed ended Wilson's official career there. He nevertheless received a year's pay and acquired ownership of some of his front companies.

ONI career
In 1971, with the CIA's knowledge and approval, Wilson moved to the Office of Naval Intelligence, where he worked full-time for a secret intelligence unit called the Naval Field Operations Support Group (NFOSG) or Task Force 157. Between its inception in 1966 and its termination in 1977, the focus was on acquiring intelligence on Soviet naval activity. However, the unit's remit was wider and later described as “the U.S. military's only network of undercover agents and spies operating abroad using commercial and business 'cover' for their espionage." At this time, Wilson set up another front company—World Marine, Inc.—to assist with his logistics work. Wilson then retired from the ONI in 1976 after events that have been disputed. After a change in commanders, Wilson reportedly appealed to Admiral Bobby Inman, the Director of Naval Intelligence, offering his influence in Congress to the ONI's budget troubles if he, Wilson, could be made chief of Task Force 157. Allegedly outraged, Inman shut down Task Force 157 altogether and reported Wilson to the FBI. However, other calculations may have been in play.

Wilson continued to run the businesses he had built under the guidance of the CIA, the largest of which was Consultants International. He reportedly amassed a fortune of over $20 million through these businesses, and continued to offer covert shipping services at the request of the CIA after his official retirement.

Arms for Libya controversy
In the 1970s, he became involved in dealings with Libya. Wilson claimed that a high-ranking CIA official Theodore "Blond Ghost" Shackley asked him to go to Libya to keep an eye on Carlos the Jackal, the infamous terrorist, who was living there. At the time, a strict sanctions regime was in place against Libya and the country was willing to pay a great deal for weapons and material. Wilson stated he began conducting elaborate dealings, and guns and military uniforms were smuggled into the country. Wilson also recruited a group of retired Green Berets—decorated Vietnam veteran Billy Waugh among them —to go to Libya and train its military and intelligence officers. The Libyans used Wilson's provisions to advance their interests around the world, including training terrorist cells to build explosive devices inside radios. One cell trained by Wilson's operatives was the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLP-GC) under the command of Ahmad Jibril. Jibril was suspected of being behind the bombing of Pan Am 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. In 1979, a gun that Wilson had arranged to be delivered to the Libyan embassy in Bonn was used to assassinate a prominent dissident. The next year, one of the Green Berets attempted to assassinate another dissident in Colorado. Wilson states that he regrets these incidents and had no prior knowledge of them. He claimed that he was still working for the CIA despite the government's continued denials, and that his supplying of weapon to the Libyans was an attempt to get close to them and gain valuable intelligence. This included attempts at gathering information on the Libyan nuclear program.

The most dramatic deal, and the one that brought Wilson to the attention of the U.S. government, was for some twenty tons of military-grade C-4 plastic explosives. This was a massive quantity that was equal to the entire U.S. domestic stockpile. Most of Wilson's connections were still under the impression that he was working for the CIA and a wide network in the United States supported his actions. The explosives were presumed assembled by a California company and hidden in barrels of oil drilling mud. They were presumed flown to Libya aboard a chartered jet.

Another scandal broke out around Wilson when a company he had formed to ship United States military aid to Egypt was convicted of overcharging the United States Department of Defense by $8 million. A partner with Edwin P. Wilson in this company was another former CIA officer, Thomas G. Clines. Wilson also maintained that Major General Richard V. Secord was also a "silent partner" in this company, though Secord denied this allegation. Nonetheless, Wilson, Clines and Theodore Shackley (another former CIA officer) were all working together with Secord in the summer of 1984 when Oliver North approached Secord to ask for help in buying arms for the Contras, a group of armed rebels then trying to overturn the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua.

Investigation and conviction
After a lengthy investigation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (then part of the U.S. Department of the Treasury), Wilson was indicted by the U.S. Justice Department for firearms and explosives violations. However, he was in Libya, which would not extradite him. Wilson was very unhappy in Libya, the Libyans were suspicious of him, and he feared for his safety. The prosecutors, led by Lawrence Barcella, knew this and they sent a con-person with links to the CIA named Ernest Keiser to convince Wilson that he would be safe in the Dominican Republic. Wilson flew to the Caribbean, but upon arrival was arrested and flown to New York.

He was put on trial four separate times. Before he stood trial, several prosecution witnesses died under suspicious circumstances, including Cuban exile Rafael Villaverde, who disappeared in a boating accident near the Bahamas after an explosion on his boat, and former CIA agent Kevin P. Mulcahy, who had worked for Wilson and blown the whistle to the government. Wilson's friend Ricardo Morales, a longtime nemesis of Villaverde in the Cuban exile community, would die in a bar fight in December 1983.

Wilson was found not guilty of trying to hire a group of Cuban exiles to kill Libyan dissident Umar Muhayshi (his co-defendant Frank Terpil never stood trial as he was a fugitive the rest of his life and died in Cuba in 2016). He was found guilty of exporting guns, including the one used in the Bonn assassination and of shipping the explosives and sentenced to 15 years in prison for the former and 17 years for the latter. While awaiting trial, he allegedly approached a fellow prisoner and attempted to hire him to kill the federal prosecutors. This prisoner was never questioned by anyone outside the CIA. The prisoner instead went to the authorities and they set Wilson up with an undercover agent. The agent taped Wilson hiring him to kill the prosecutors, six witnesses and his ex-wife. In a subsequent trial, he was sentenced to an added 24 years in jail for conspiracy to murder.

Legal defense
Wilson's defense to the Libyan charges was that he was working at the behest of the CIA. The CIA gave the DOJ an affidavit stating that, after his retirement, he had not been employed directly or indirectly by the agency. The CIA later informed the DOJ that it should not use the affidavit at trial, but the prosecutor Ted Greenberg decided to use it anyway.

While in prison, Wilson campaigned vigorously for his innocence and repeatedly filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the government. Eventually, he found information linked to the memo and hired a new lawyer. His lawyer was David Adler, a former CIA officer who had clearance to view classified documents. Adler spent long hours poring through thousands of files and eventually found 80 incidents where Wilson met on a professional basis with the CIA and proof that the CIA had indirectly used Wilson after his retirement.

In October 2003, by U.S. District Judge Lynn Hughes, overturning his conviction on the explosives charge, found that U.S. Justice Department prosecutors knew Wilson had worked for the CIA. Wilson was released from prison on September 14, 2004, after being incarcerated for 22 years. Over 12 of those years were in solitary confinement.

Civil action
Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges, and a past executive director of the CIA. On March 29, 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the ground that all eight had immunity covering their actions.

Later life
After his 2004 release from prison, Wilson moved north of Seattle to live with his brother. On 10 September 2012, Wilson died of complications from heart valve replacement surgery, survived by his sons Karl and Erik, sister Leora Pinkston and girlfriend Cate Callahan.

title: Edwin P. Wilson


text: User talk:66.253.180.150

title: User talk:66.253.180.150


text:
Jeremias de Dekker

Jeremias de Dekker or Decker (August 1609 – November 1666) was a Dutch poet.

Biography
Dekker was born in Dordrecht. His father was a native of Antwerp, who, having embraced the reformed religion, had been compelled to take refuge in the Netherlands. Entering his father's business at an early age, Jeremias found leisure to cultivate his taste for literature and especially for poetry, and to acquire without assistance a competent knowledge of English, French, Latin and Italian.

His first poem was a paraphrase of the Lamentations of Jeremiah (Klaagliedern van Jeremias), which was followed by translations and imitations of Horace, Juvenal and other Latin poets. The most important of his original poems were a collection of epigrams (Puntdichten) and a satire in praise of avarice (Lof der Geldzucht). The latter is his best-known work. Written in a vein of light and yet effective irony, it is usually ranked by critics along with Erasmus's Praise of Folly. Dekker died in Amsterdam in November 1666.

Works
A complete collection of his poems, edited by Brouerius van Nideck, was published at Amsterdam in 1726 under the title Exercices poétiques (2 vols. 4to.). Selections from his poems are included in Siegenbeck's Proeven van nederduitsche Dichtkunde (1823), and from his epigrams in Geijsbeek's Epigrammatische Anthologie (1827).

title: Jeremias de Dekker