text:
Tiny Dancer

"Tiny Dancer" is a song written by English musician and composer Elton John and lyricist Bernie Taupin, and performed by John. It was originally released on John's 1971 album Madman Across the Water, and was later produced and released as a single in 1972.

In the United States, it was certified gold on 19 May 2005, platinum on 19 August 2011 and 3× platinum on 26 April 2018 by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). In the UK, "Tiny Dancer" was certified gold on 17 August 2018 by the British Phonographic Industry, platinum on 2 August 2019, and 2× platinum on 24 December 2021.

Background and writing
With lyrics written by Bernie Taupin, the song was first featured as the opening track to John's 1971 album, Madman Across the Water. The song's lyrics were inspired by Taupin's first visit to the US in 1970, and were intended to capture the spirit of California, where he found the women he met highly contrasted with those whom he had known in his home country of England. Taupin also stated in a 1973 interview in Rolling Stone that the song is about Maxine Feibelman, his wife at the time. In 2019, Feibelman said, "I knew [the song] was about me. I had been into ballet as a little girl and sewed patches on Elton's jackets and jeans", referring to the song's description of a "seamstress for the band".

History
The song features piano-based accompaniment during verses. The arrangement start features pedal steel guitar played by British guitarist B. J. Cole, light percussion, Paul Buckmaster's strings and a quiet choir. Back-up vocals are provided by Tony Burrows, among others.

Due to the song's lengthy run time of 6 minutes, 12 seconds, "Tiny Dancer" was initially a non-starter as a single in the US, reaching only No. 41 on the U.S. pop chart, and was not even released as a single in the UK. Some radio edits ended the song following the first chorus, because the first verse repeats. Some radio stations banned the song, due to the controversial opening lines of the second verse: "Jesus Freaks/ Out in the Streets". The song fared better in Canada, where John had much of his early commercial breakthrough success, peaking at #19. It was also a hit in Australia, peaking at #13. Eventually, the song slowly became one of John's most popular songs even in the territories that initially failed to embrace it, and the full-length version is now a fixture on North American, UK and Australian adult contemporary and rock radio stations. The song also received a boost of popularity after being prominently featured in the 2000 film Almost Famous. The song was also featured in the 1975 film Aloha, Bobby and Rose.

In 1971, Elton John performed the song on the first series of The Old Grey Whistle Test. The performance has been released as part of The Old Grey Whistle Test – Volumes 1–3 Box Set.

In 2010, Rolling Stone ranked the song number 397 on their list of the 500 Greatest Songs of All Time. It was ranked No. 47 on the 2021 revision of the list.

In 2020, the song was inducted into the Grammy Hall of Fame.

Live performances
Since 1971, John regularly performed this song alongside "Levon" on his concert tours in various decades.

An orchestral live version of the song was performed by John with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra on 14 December 1986 at the Sydney Entertainment Centre during the final concert of his 1986 Tour De Force tour in Australia. That performance was included on his 1987 live album Live in Australia with the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra.

Music video
In May 2017, an official music video for "Tiny Dancer" premiered at the Cannes Film Festival as a winner of Elton John: The Cut, a competition organised in partnership with AKQA, Pulse Films, and YouTube in honour of the fiftieth anniversary of his songwriting relationship with Taupin. The competition called upon independent filmmakers to submit treatments for music videos for one of three Elton John songs from the 1970s, with each song falling within a specific concept category. "Tiny Dancer" was designated for the live-action category, with the competition won by Max Weiland. The video was filmed in Los Angeles, and features scenes of various residents driving around the city, including performer Marilyn Manson and Iris Karina.

Personnel

 * Elton John – acoustic piano, vocals
 * Caleb Quaye – electric guitar
 * B. J. Cole – pedal steel guitar
 * Davey Johnstone – acoustic guitar
 * David Glover – bass guitar
 * Roger Pope – drums
 * Paul Buckmaster – orchestral arrangements and conductor
 * David Katz – orchestra contractor
 * Tony Burrows – backing vocals
 * Nigel Olsson – backing vocals
 * Roger Cook – backing vocals
 * Dee Murray – backing vocals
 * Lesley Duncan – backing vocals
 * Barry St. John – backing vocals
 * Terry Steele – backing vocals
 * Liza Strike – backing vocals
 * Sue and Sunny – backing vocals

Covers
In 2009, DJ Ironik and Chipmunk created a remix of the song, featuring John singing the chorus, which peaked at No. 3 on the UK Singles Chart.

In 1990, John Frusciante of the Red Hot Chili Peppers performed his first impromptu performance of the song for the audience of Pinkpop that year. He has since performed the song at least fifty times during Red hot Chili Peppers shows.

A version featuring Mary Black, Paddy Casey and Declan O'Rourke was recorded in Galway, Ireland in 2012 as a charity single. This version reached number one on the Irish Singles Chart.

In season 3 episode 1 of Friends "The One with the Princess Leia Fantasy", when discussing the most romantic songs, Lisa Kudrow's character Phoebe says that her favourite, the song Tiny Dancer, was in fact written for Tony Danza which she tries to prove by singing the line "Hold me close, young Tony Danza". After a Friends: The Reunion episode, Courteney Cox invited Elton John, Ed Sheeran and Brandi Carlile to pay a short tribute to Lisa's character once famously misquoting the song.

Tim McGraw covered the song for his 2002 album Tim McGraw and the Dancehall Doctors.

In 2022, it was reported that John was teaming with Britney Spears in a remake of "Tiny Dancer". Later on, John announced a song titled "Hold Me Closer", with Spears also confirming her involvement in the track. The song was released on 26 August 2022, though it leaked online a week ahead. "Hold Me Closer" is a duet between John and Spears that blends the chorus of "Tiny Dancer" with verses from John's 1992 single "The One".

The song is sung in a scene from the 2000 film Almost Famous when everyone is on the bus after a house party when Russell jumped off the roof into the pool.

title: Tiny Dancer


text: Category:892 births

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

title: Category:892 births


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Politics.ie

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. – ABCD 01:38, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Politics.ie
This is a stub about a non-notable website. It was added by an anonymous contributor and spam links to the website in question have also been anonymously added to various articles on Irish politics in the recent past. We should delete. Iota 19:23, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Obvious vanity/promo delete DDerby 21:42, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, website advert. Megan1967 02:45, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * delete Mozzerati 19:39, 2005 Apr 10 (UTC)
 * Delete - I live in Ireland and have heard of the website but it's not that well known even here. -- Lochaber 13:25, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Air Marshall Islands

Air Marshall Islands is an airline based in Majuro, Marshall Islands. It is the flag carrier of the Marshall Islands, operating inter-island services in the Central Pacific. Its main base is Marshall Islands International Airport, Majuro.

History
The airline was established in 1980 as Airline of the Marshall Islands; the current title was adopted in 1989. The airline is wholly owned by the Government of the Marshall Islands.

In January 2009, all flights were suspended while the airline's only plane, a 34-seat Bombardier Dash 8, suffered wing damage after colliding with an FAA antenna tower while being towed. Replacement parts were ordered, but flights were further delayed when the replacement part that arrived in February was for the wrong wing.

Services
The airline's main base is at Majuro; the company operates flights to Bikini Atoll, Enewetak Atoll, Kwajalein Atoll, Rongelap Atoll and Jeh and Woja on Ailinglaplap Atoll. The flight schedule has most flights operating on a weekly basis.

Air Marshall Islands has offices providing reservations and flight information services at Majuro, Ebeye and Kwajalein.

Current fleet
The Air Marshall Islands fleet consists of the following turboprop aircraft :

Former fleet
The airline's fleet previously included the following aircraft (as of December 2015):

Historically, according to the Official Airline Guide (OAG), Air Marshall Islands was operating a Douglas DC-8-62CF "Combi" jetliner as well as a Hawker Siddeley HS 748 turboprop aircraft supplied in 1982. The DC-8 Combi was operated in a mixed passenger/freight configuration and provided service linking Honolulu (HNL) with Kwajalein (KWA) and Majuro (MAJ) in competition with Continental Micronesia which was operating flights on the same routes with Boeing 727-200 aircraft at the time. Air Marshall Islands also operated a Saab 2000 high speed turboprop during the 1990s. In addition, GAF Nomad STOL capable turboprop aircraft were previously operated as well.
 * 1 Douglas DC-8 (1991-1996. Operated by Hawaiian Airlines 1991–1992. Operated by Arrow Air 1992–1996.
 * 1 Saab 2000 (1995-1998)
 * 1 BAe 748 (1982-1996)

title: Air Marshall Islands


text: Category:900 births

title: Category:900 births


text:
User:Programmerdude

Bold textItalic text

title: User:Programmerdude


text: Category:903 deaths

title: Category:903 deaths


text:
User:Mcelroy

McElroy:
 * libertarian
 * Atlanta resident

title: User:Mcelroy


text: Category:904 deaths

title: Category:904 deaths


text:
Jesse Orosco

Jesse Russell Orosco (born April 21, 1957) is an American former professional baseball relief pitcher. He played in Major League Baseball from 1979 to 2003 for the New York Mets, Los Angeles Dodgers, Cleveland Indians, Milwaukee Brewers, Baltimore Orioles, St. Louis Cardinals, San Diego Padres, New York Yankees and Minnesota Twins.

Orosco was named to the MLB All-Star Game in 1983 and 1984. Orosco won a World Series in 1986 with the Mets and in 1988 with the Dodgers. He retired when he was 46 years old, one of the oldest players to still be playing in the modern age. Orosco is one of only 31 players in baseball history to date to have appeared in Major League games in four decades.

Orosco holds the major league record for career pitching appearances, having pitched in 1,252 games. His longevity was aided by the increasing use of left-handed specialist relief pitchers from the 1990s onward; in his last several years, he was used almost exclusively in this role.

Career
Orosco was drafted out of Santa Barbara City College by the Minnesota Twins in the 1978 Major League Baseball draft. In February 1979, the Twins traded Orosco to the New York Mets to complete a deal that had sent veteran starter Jerry Koosman to Minnesota two months earlier.

Orosco made his debut on April 5, 1979, with the Mets. Orosco had his best seasons in the early and mid-1980s with the Mets. He had a career-best 1.47 earned run average in 1983. That year, he also won 13 games and saved 17, with 110 innings pitched, making his first All-Star Team and finishing third in the National League Cy Young Award voting. He had 31 saves in 1984, which was third in the National League, and went 10–6 in 60 appearances, good enough for his second All-Star selection. In 1985, he began sharing closing duties for the Mets with right-hander Roger McDowell, giving the Mets a vaunted lefty–righty combo coming out of the bullpen to close games.

In 1983, Orosco became just the third and, to date, the last Mets pitcher to record two wins in the same day. This feat had been accomplished by Craig Anderson in 1962 and Willard Hunter in 1964. On July 31, 1983, Banner Day, the Mets won both games of a double-header against the Pirates in extra-inning walk-off wins. Orosco pitched the last four innings of the first game and the final inning of the second game, and both times was the pitcher of record when the Mets rallied to win.

Orosco's clutch relief pitching in the 1986 postseason was one of the key reasons the Mets won the World Series. He was on the mound for the final pitch of the final game of both the NLCS against the Houston Astros, and the World Series against the Boston Red Sox, striking out the final batter in both series. He became the first (and only) relief pitcher to get three wins in one playoff series, which he accomplished in the NLCS against the Astros.

At his peak, Orosco was virtually unhittable against left-handed batters. Rob Neyer later wrote that Orosco stayed in the majors for almost a quarter-century because of "his ability to make lefties look foolish."

After the 1987 season, the Mets sent Orosco to the Los Angeles Dodgers in a three-team trade in which the Dodgers sent Bob Welch and Matt Young to the Oakland Athletics and Jack Savage to the Mets, the Athletics sent Alfredo Griffin and Jay Howell to the Dodgers, and the Athletics sent Kevin Tapani and Wally Whitehurst to the Mets. Orosco was a member of the 1988 World Series champions. He then signed with the Cleveland Indians and stayed there for three years.

Orosco played for the Orioles for the latter half of the 1990s. While his best seasons came in New York, he had an excellent 1997 season, finishing with a 2.32 ERA, his best since the 1980s. On June 25, 1999, Orosco set the all-time record for major league relief appearance with 1,051, passing Kent Tekulve.

After the 1999 season, the Orioles traded Orosco to the Mets for Chuck McElroy. Before the 2000 season began, the Mets traded him to the St. Louis Cardinals for Joe McEwing. Granted free agency after the 2000 season, Orosco signed with the Dodgers for the 2001 season and again for the 2002 season. He signed with the San Diego Padres for the 2003 season.

In 2003, Orosco was on three different teams and finished with 33 innings pitched. On July 23, the Padres traded Orosco to the New York Yankees for a player to be named later. At the end of August, the Yankees traded him to the Twins for a player to be named later, later identified as Juan Padilla. Orosco played his last game on September 27 with the Twins. He signed with the Arizona Diamondbacks for the 2004 season, but decided to retire before spring training.

Orosco was eligible for the Baseball Hall of Fame in 2009; however, his lifetime stats made him a longshot for the Hall and he dropped off the ballot after receiving one vote. He was the last active MLB player from the 1970s, outlasting Rickey Henderson (the last active position player).

, Orosco is the only player in Major League history with more than 1,200 games pitched or more than 1,000 inherited runners.

title: Jesse Orosco


text:
User talk:Programmerdude

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

title: User talk:Programmerdude


text:
Warren Court

The Warren Court was the period in the history of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1953 to 1969 when Earl Warren served as the chief justice. The Warren Court is often considered the most liberal court in U.S. history.

The Warren Court expanded civil rights, civil liberties, judicial power, and the federal power in dramatic ways. It has been widely recognized that the court, led by the liberal bloc, created a major "Constitutional Revolution" in U.S. history.

The Warren Court brought "one man, one vote" to the United States through a series of rulings, and created the Miranda warning. In addition, the court was both applauded and criticized for bringing an end to de jure racial segregation in the United States, incorporating the Bill of Rights (i.e. including it in the 14th Amendment Due Process clause), and ending officially sanctioned voluntary prayer in public schools. The period is recognized as the most liberal point that judicial power had ever reached, but with a substantial continuing impact.

Membership
The Warren Court began on October 5, 1953, when President Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren, the incumbent governor of California, to replace Fred Vinson as Chief Justice of the United States. The court began with Warren and the final eight members of the Vinson Court: Hugo Black, Stanley Forman Reed, Felix Frankfurter, William O. Douglas, Robert H. Jackson, Harold Hitz Burton, Tom C. Clark, and Sherman Minton.

Jackson died in 1954 and Minton retired in 1956, and they were replaced by John Marshall Harlan II and William Brennan. Another vacancy took place when Reed retired in 1957 and was replaced by Charles Evans Whittaker, and then Burton retired in 1958, with Eisenhower appointing Potter Stewart in his place. When Frankfurter and Whittaker retired in 1962, then-President John F. Kennedy was given the power to appoint two new justices: Byron White and Arthur Goldberg. However, President Lyndon B. Johnson encouraged Goldberg to resign in 1965 to become Ambassador to the United Nations, and nominated Abe Fortas to take his place. Clark retired in 1967, and Johnson appointed the first African American justice, Thurgood Marshall to the court. The Warren Court concluded on June 23, 1969 when Earl Warren retired and was replaced by Warren E. Burger. Prominent members of the Court during the Warren Court era besides the Chief Justice included Associate Justices: Brennan, Douglas, Black, Frankfurter, and Harlan II.

Other branches
Presidents during this court included Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Richard Nixon. Congresses during this court included 83rd through the 91st United States Congresses.

Warren's leadership
One of the primary factors in Warren's leadership was his political background, having served two and a half terms as Governor of California (1943–1953) and experience as the Republican candidate for vice president in 1948 (as running mate of Thomas E. Dewey). Warren brought a strong belief in the remedial power of law. According to historian Bernard Schwartz, Warren's view of the law was pragmatic, seeing it as an instrument for obtaining equity and fairness. Schwartz argues that Warren's approach was most effective "when the political institutions had defaulted on their responsibility to try to address problems such as segregation and reapportionment and cases where the constitutional rights of defendants were abused."

A related component of Warren's leadership was his focus on broad ethical principles, rather than narrower interpretative structures. Describing the latter as "conventional reasoning patterns," Professor G. Edward White suggests Warren often disregarded these in groundbreaking cases such as Brown v. Board of Education, Reynolds v. Sims and Miranda v. Arizona, where such traditional sources of precedent were stacked against him. White suggests Warren's principles "were philosophical, political, and intuitive, not legal in the conventional technical sense."

Warren's leadership was characterized by remarkable consensus on the court, particularly in some of the most controversial cases. These included Brown v. Board of Education, Gideon v. Wainwright, and Cooper v. Aaron, which were unanimously decided, as well as Abington School District v. Schempp and Engel v. Vitale, each striking down religious recitations in schools with only one dissent. In an unusual action, the decision in Cooper was personally signed by all nine justices, with the three new members of the Court adding that they supported and would have joined the Court's decision in Brown v. Board.

Fallon says that, "Some thrilled to the approach of the Warren Court. Many law professors were perplexed, often sympathetic to the Court's results but skeptical of the soundness of its constitutional reasoning. And some of course were horrified."

Vision
Professor John Hart Ely in his book Democracy and Distrust famously characterized the Warren Court as a "Carolene Products Court". This referred to the famous Footnote Four in United States v. Carolene Products, in which the Supreme Court had suggested that heightened judicial scrutiny might be appropriate in three types of cases:

 * those where a law was challenged as a deprivation of a specifically enumerated right (such as a challenge to a law because it denies "freedom of speech", a phrase specifically included in the Bill of Rights);
 * those where a challenged law made it more difficult to achieve change through normal political processes; and
 * those where a law impinged on the rights of "discrete and insular minorities."

The Warren Court's doctrine can be seen as proceeding aggressively in these general areas:

 * its aggressive reading of the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights (as "incorporated" against the states by the Fourteenth Amendment)
 * its commitment to unblocking the channels of political change ("one-man, one-vote")
 * its vigorous protection of the rights of racial minority groups

The Warren Court, while in many cases taking a broad view of individual rights, generally declined to read the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment broadly, outside of the incorporation context (see Ferguson v. Skrupa, but see also Griswold v. Connecticut). The Warren Court's decisions were also strongly nationalist in thrust, as the Court read Congress's power under the Commerce Clause quite broadly and often expressed an unwillingness to allow constitutional rights to vary from state to state (as was explicitly manifested in Cooper v. Aaron).

Professor Rebecca Zietlow argues that the Warren Court brought an expansion in the "rights of belonging", which she characterizes as "rights that promote an inclusive vision of who belongs to the national community and facilitate equal membership in that community".

Archibald Cox, who as Solicitor General from 1961 to 1965 saw the Court up close, summarized: "The responsibility of government for equality among men, the openness of American society to change and reform, and the decency of the administration of criminal justice received both creative and enduring impetus from the work of the Warren Court."

Historically significant decisions

Important decisions during the Warren Court years included decisions holding segregation policies in public schools (Brown v. Board of Education) and anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional (Loving v. Virginia); ruling that the Constitution protects a general right to privacy (Griswold v. Connecticut); that states are bound by the decisions of the Supreme Court and cannot ignore them (Cooper v. Aaron); that public schools cannot have official prayer (Engel v. Vitale) or mandatory Bible readings (Abington School District v. Schempp); the scope of the doctrine of incorporation (Mapp v. Ohio, Miranda v. Arizona) was dramatically increased; reading an equal protection clause into the Fifth Amendment (Bolling v. Sharpe); holding that the states may not apportion a chamber of their legislatures in the manner in which the United States Senate is apportioned (Reynolds v. Sims); and holding that the Constitution requires active compliance (Gideon v. Wainwright).

 * Racial segregation: Brown v. Board of Education, Bolling v. Sharpe, Cooper v. Aaron, Gomillion v. Lightfoot, Griffin v. County School Board, Green v. School Board of New Kent County, Lucy v. Adams, Loving v. Virginia, Boynton v. Virginia
 * Voting, redistricting, and malapportionment: Baker v. Carr, Reynolds v. Sims, Wesberry v. Sanders
 * Criminal procedure: Brady v. Maryland, Mapp v. Ohio, Miranda v. Arizona, Escobedo v. Illinois, Gideon v. Wainwright, Katz v. United States, Terry v. Ohio
 * Free speech: New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, Brandenburg v. Ohio, Yates v. United States, Roth v. United States, Jacobellis v. Ohio, Memoirs v. Massachusetts, Tinker v. Des Moines School District
 * Establishment Clause: Engel v. Vitale, Abington School District v. Schempp
 * Free Exercise Clause: Sherbert v. Verner
 * Right to privacy and reproductive rights: Griswold v. Connecticut
 * Cruel and unusual punishment: Trop v. Dulles, Robinson v. California

Warren's role
Warren took his seat January 11, 1954, on a recess appointment by President Eisenhower; the Senate confirmed him six weeks later. Despite his lack of judicial experience, his years in the Alameda County district attorney's office and as state attorney general gave him far more knowledge of the law in practice than most other members of the Court had. Warren's greatest asset, what made him in the eyes of many of his admirers "Super Chief," was his political skill in manipulating the other justices. Over the years his ability to lead the Court, to forge majorities in support of major decisions, and to inspire liberal forces around the nation, outweighed his intellectual weaknesses. Warren realized his weakness and asked the senior associate justice, Hugo L. Black, to preside over conferences until he became accustomed to the drill. A quick study, Warren soon was in fact, as well as in name, the Court's chief justice.

When Warren joined the Court in 1954 all the justices had been appointed by Franklin D. Roosevelt or Harry S. Truman, and all were committed New Deal liberals. They disagreed about the role that the courts should play in achieving liberal goals. The Court was split between two warring factions. Felix Frankfurter and Robert H. Jackson led one faction, which insisted upon judicial self-restraint and insisted courts should defer to the policymaking prerogatives of the White House and Congress. Hugo Black and William O. Douglas led the opposing faction that agreed the court should defer to Congress in matters of economic policy, but felt the judicial agenda had been transformed from questions of property rights to those of individual liberties, and in this area courts should play a more central role. Warren's belief that the judiciary must seek to do justice, placed him with the latter group, although he did not have a solid majority until after Frankfurter's retirement in 1962.

Decisions
Warren was a more liberal justice than anyone had anticipated. Warren was able to craft a long series of landmark decisions because he built a winning coalition. When Frankfurter retired in 1962 and President John F. Kennedy named labor union lawyer Arthur Goldberg to replace him, Warren finally had the fifth vote for his liberal majority. William J. Brennan, Jr., a liberal Democrat appointed by Eisenhower in 1956, was the intellectual leader of the faction that included Black and Douglas. Brennan complemented Warren's political skills with the strong legal skills Warren lacked. Warren and Brennan met before the regular conferences to plan out their strategy.

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)
Brown v. Board of Education banned the segregation of public schools. The very first case put Warren's leadership skills to an extraordinary test. The Legal Defense Fund of the NAACP (a small legal group formed for tax reasons from the much better known NAACP) had been waging a systematic legal fight against the "separate but equal" doctrine enunciated in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) and finally had challenged Plessy in a series of five related cases, which had been argued before the Court in the spring of 1953. However the justices had been unable to decide the issue and asked to rehear the case in fall 1953, with special attention to whether the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause prohibited the operation of separate public schools for whites and blacks.

While all but one justice personally rejected segregation, the self-restraint faction questioned whether the Constitution gave the Court the power to order its end. Warren's faction believed the Fourteenth Amendment did give the necessary authority and were pushing to go ahead. Warren, who held only a recess appointment, held his tongue until the Senate, dominated by southerners, confirmed his appointment. Warren told his colleagues after oral argument that he believed segregation violated the Constitution and that only if one considered African Americans inferior to whites could the practice be upheld. But he did not push for a vote. Instead, he talked with the justices and encouraged them to talk with each other as he sought a common ground on which all could stand. Finally he had eight votes, and the last holdout, Stanley Reed of Kentucky, agreed to join the rest. Warren drafted the basic opinion in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and kept circulating and revising it until he had an opinion endorsed by all the members of the Court.

The unanimity Warren achieved helped speed the drive to desegregate public schools, which came about under President Richard M. Nixon. Throughout his tenure in the bench, Warren succeeded in keeping all decisions concerning segregation unanimous. Brown applied to schools, but soon the Court enlarged the concept to other state actions, striking down racial classification in many areas. Congress ratified the process in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Warren did compromise by agreeing to Frankfurter's demand that the Court go slowly in implementing desegregation; Warren used Frankfurter's suggestion that a 1955 decision (Brown II) include the phrase "all deliberate speed."

The Brown decision of 1954 marked, in dramatic fashion, the radical shift in the Court's – and the nation's –  priorities from issues of property rights to civil liberties. Under Warren the courts became an active partner in governing the nation, although still not coequal. Warren never saw the courts as a backward-looking branch of government.

The Brown decision was a powerful moral statement. His biographer concludes, "If Warren had not been on the Court, the Brown decision might not have been unanimous and might not have generated a moral groundswell that was to contribute to the emergence of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. Warren was never a legal scholar on par with Frankfurter or a great advocate of particular doctrines, as were Black and Douglas. Instead, he believed that in all branches of government common sense, decency, and elemental justice were decisive, not stare decisis (that is, reliance on previous Court decisions), tradition, or the text of the Constitution. He wanted results that in his opinion reflected the best American sentiments. He felt racial segregation was simply wrong, and Brown, whatever its doctrinal defects, remains a landmark decision primarily because of Warren's interpretation of the equal protection clause.

Reapportionment
The one man, one vote cases (Baker v. Carr and Reynolds v. Sims) of 1962–1964, had the effect of ending the over-representation of rural areas in state legislatures, as well as the under-representation of suburbs. Central cities – which had long been under-represented –  were now losing population to the suburbs and were not greatly affected.

Warren's priority on fairness shaped other major decisions. In 1962, over the strong objections of Frankfurter, the Court agreed that questions regarding malapportionment in state legislatures were not political issues, and thus were not outside the Court's purview. For years underpopulated rural areas had deprived metropolitan centers of equal representation in state legislatures. In Warren's California, Los Angeles County had only one state senator. Cities had long since passed their peak, and now it was the middle class suburbs that were underrepresented. Frankfurter insisted that the Court should avoid this "political thicket" and warned that the Court would never be able to find a clear formula to guide lower courts in the rash of lawsuits sure to follow. But Douglas found such a formula: "one man, one vote."

In the key apportionment case Reynolds v. Sims (1964) Warren delivered a civics lesson: "To the extent that a citizen's right to vote is debased, he is that much less a citizen," Warren declared. "The weight of a citizen's vote cannot be made to depend on where he lives. This is the clear and strong command of our Constitution's Equal Protection Clause." Unlike the desegregation cases, in this instance, the Court ordered immediate action, and despite loud outcries from rural legislators, Congress failed to reach the two-thirds needed pass a constitutional amendment. The states complied, reapportioned their legislatures quickly and with minimal troubles. Numerous commentators have concluded reapportionment was the Warren Court's great "success" story.

Due process and rights of defendants (1963–1966)
In Gideon v. Wainwright, the Court held that the Sixth Amendment required that all indigent criminal defendants receive publicly funded counsel (Florida law at that time required the assignment of free counsel to indigent defendants only in capital cases); Miranda v. Arizona, required that certain rights of a person interrogated while in police custody be clearly explained, including the right to an attorney (often called the "Miranda warning").

While most Americans eventually agreed that the Court's desegregation and apportionment decisions were fair and right, disagreement about the "due process revolution" continues into the 21st century. Warren took the lead in criminal justice; despite his years as a tough prosecutor, he always insisted that the police must play fair or the accused should go free. Warren was privately outraged at what he considered police abuses that ranged from warrantless searches to forced confessions.

Warren’s Court ordered lawyers for indigent defendants, in Gideon v. Wainwright (1963), and prevented prosecutors from using evidence seized in illegal searches, in Mapp v. Ohio (1961). The famous case of Miranda v. Arizona (1966) summed up Warren's philosophy. Everyone, even one accused of crimes, still enjoyed constitutionally protected rights, and the police had to respect those rights and issue a specific warning when making an arrest. Warren did not believe in coddling criminals; thus in Terry v. Ohio (1968) he gave police officers leeway to stop and frisk those they had reason to believe held weapons.

Conservatives angrily denounced the "handcuffing of the police." Violent crime and homicide rates shot up nationwide in the following years; in New York City, for example, after steady to declining trends until the early 1960s, the homicide rate doubled in the period from 1964 to 1974 from just under 5 per 100,000 at the beginning of that period to just under 10 per 100,000 in 1974. Controversy exists about the cause, with conservatives blaming the Court decisions, and liberals pointing to the demographic boom and increased urbanization and income inequality characteristic of that era. After 1992 the homicide rates fell sharply.

First Amendment
The Warren Court also sought to expand the scope of application of the First Amendment. The Court's decision outlawing mandatory school prayer in Engel v. Vitale (1962) brought vehement complaints by conservatives that echoed into the 21st century.

Other Issues
Warren worked to nationalize the Bill of Rights by applying it to the states. Moreover, in one of the landmark cases decided by the Court, Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), the Warren Court affirmed a constitutionally protected right of privacy, emanating from the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, also known as substantive due process.

This ruling was critical even after Warren's retirement (and Fortas' untimely departure as well) for the outcome of the Roe v. Wade case which recognized the constitutional right to abortion.

With the exception of the desegregation decisions, few decisions were unanimous. The eminent scholar Justice John Marshall Harlan II took Frankfurter's place as the Court's self-constraint spokesman, often joined by Potter Stewart and Byron R. White. But with the appointment of Thurgood Marshall, the first black justice (as well as the first non-white justice), and Abe Fortas (replacing Goldberg), Warren could count on six votes in most cases.

title: Warren Court


text: Category:923 births

title: Category:923 births


text: Category:930 births

title: Category:930 births


text: Category:953 births

title: Category:953 births


text:
Rather

Rather may refer to:
 * Ratherius, bishop of Verona

Surname

 * Dan Rather, news presenter
 * Rather, 2023 documentary by Frank Marshall about the news presenter
 * Elizabeth Rather, expert in the computer programming language Forth
 * Hilal Ahmed Rather, Indian Air Force air vice marshal from Kashmir
 * Susan Rather, character in 555 (1988 film)

title: Rather


text: Category:994 births

title: Category:994 births


text:
Moody's Ratings

Moody's Ratings, previously known as Moody's Investors Service, often referred to as Moody's, is the bond credit rating business of Moody's Corporation, representing the company's traditional line of business and its historical name. Moody's Ratings provides international financial research on bonds issued by commercial and government entities. Moody's, along with Standard & Poor's and Fitch Group, is considered one of the Big Three credit rating agencies. It is also included in the Fortune 500 list of 2021.

The company ranks the creditworthiness of borrowers using a standardized ratings scale which measures expected investor loss in the event of default. Moody's Ratings rates debt securities in several bond market segments. These include government, municipal and corporate bonds; managed investments such as money market funds and fixed-income funds; financial institutions including banks and non-bank finance companies; and asset classes in structured finance. In Moody's Ratings system, securities are assigned a rating from Aaa to C, with Aaa being the highest quality and C the lowest quality.

Moody's was founded by John Moody in 1909, to produce manuals of statistics related to stocks and bonds and bond ratings. In 1975, the company was identified as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO) by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Following several decades of ownership by Dun & Bradstreet, Moody's Investors Service became a separate company in 2000. Moody's Corporation was established as a holding company. On 6 March 2024, Moody's Investors Service was renamed to Moody's Ratings.

Role in capital markets
Together, they are sometimes referred to as the Big Three credit rating agencies. While credit rating agencies are sometimes viewed as interchangeable, Moody's, S&P and Fitch in fact rate bonds differently; for example, S&P and Fitch Ratings measure the probability that a security will default, while Moody's ratings seek to measure the expected losses in the event of a default. All three operate worldwide, maintaining offices on six continents, and rating tens of trillions of dollars in securities. However, only Moody's Corporation is a free-standing company.

Moody's Ratings and its close competitors play a key role in global capital markets as three supplementary credit analysis provider for banks and other financial institutions in assessing the credit risk of particular securities. This form of third party analysis is particularly useful for smaller and less sophisticated investors, as well as for all investors to use as an external comparison for their own judgments.

Credit rating agencies also play an important role in the laws and regulations of the United States and several other countries, such as those of the European Union. In the United States their credit ratings are used in regulation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (NRSROs) for a variety of regulatory purposes. Among the effects of regulatory use was to enable lower-rated companies to sell bond debt for the first time; their lower ratings merely distinguished them from higher-rated companies, rather than excluding them altogether, as had been the case. However, another aspect of mechanical use of ratings by regulatory agencies has been to reinforce "pro-cyclical" and "cliff effects" of downgrades. In October 2010, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) created a set of "principles to reduce reliance" on credit rating agencies in the laws, regulations and market practices of G-20 member countries. Since the early 1990s, the SEC has also used NRSRO ratings in measuring the commercial paper held by money market funds.

The SEC has designated seven other firms as NRSROs, including, for example, A. M. Best, which focuses on obligations of insurance companies. Companies with which Moody's competes in specific areas include investment research company Morningstar, Inc. and publishers of financial information for investors such as Thomson Reuters and Bloomberg L.P.

Especially since the early 2000s, Moody's frequently makes its analysts available to journalists, and issues regular public statements on credit conditions. Moody's, like S&P, organizes public seminars to educate first-time securities issuers on the information it uses to analyze debt securities.

Moody's purchased a controlling share in the "climate risk data firm" Four Twenty Seven in 2019.

Moody's credit ratings
According to Moody's, the purpose of its ratings is to "provide investors with a simple system of gradation by which future relative creditworthiness of securities may be gauged". To each of its ratings from Aa through Caa, Moody's appends numerical modifiers 1, 2 and 3; the lower the number, the higher-end the rating. Aaa, Ca and C are not modified this way. As Moody's explains, its ratings are "not to be construed as recommendations", nor are they intended to be a sole basis for investment decisions. In addition, its ratings don't speak to market price, although market conditions may impact credit risk.

Founding and early history
Moody's traces its history back to two publishing companies established by John Moody, the inventor of modern bond credit ratings. In 1900, Moody published his first market assessment, called Moody's Manual of Industrial and Miscellaneous Securities, and established John Moody & Company. The publication provided detailed statistics relating to stocks and bonds of financial institutions, government agencies, manufacturing, mining, utilities, and food companies. It experienced early success, selling out its first print run in its first two months. By 1903, Moody's Manual was a nationally recognized publication. Moody was forced to sell his business, due to a shortage of capital, when the 1907 financial crisis fueled several changes in the markets.

Moody returned in 1909 with a new publication focused solely on railroad bonds, Analysis of Railroad Investments, and a new company, Moody's Analyses Publishing Company. While Moody acknowledged that the concept of bond ratings "was not entirely original" with him—he credited early bond rating efforts in Vienna and Berlin as inspiration—he was the first to publish them widely, in an accessible format. Moody was also the first to charge subscription fees to investors. In 1913 he expanded the manual's focus to include industrial firms and utilities; the new Moody's Manual offered ratings of public securities, indicated by a letter-rating system borrowed from mercantile credit-reporting firms. The following year, Moody incorporated the company as Moody's Investors Service. Other rating companies followed over the next few years, including the antecedents of the "Big Three" credit rating agencies: Poor's in 1916, Standard Statistics Company in 1922, and the Fitch Publishing Company in 1924.

Moody's expanded its focus to include ratings for U.S. state and local government bonds in 1919 and, by 1924, Moody's rated nearly the entire U.S. bond market.

1930s to mid-century
The relationship between the U.S. bond market and rating agencies developed further in the 1930s. As the market grew beyond that of traditional investment banking institutions, new investors again called for increased transparency, leading to the passage of new, mandatory disclosure laws for issuers, and the creation of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In 1936 a new set of laws were introduced, prohibiting banks from investing in "speculative investment securities" ("junk bonds", in modern terminology) as determined by "recognized rating manuals". Banks were permitted only to hold "investment grade" bonds, following the judgment of Moody's, along with Standard, Poor's and Fitch. In the decades that followed, state insurance regulators approved similar requirements.

In 1962, Moody's Investors Service was bought by Dun & Bradstreet, a firm engaged in the related field of credit reporting, although they continued to operate largely as independent companies.

1970s to 2000
In the late 1960s and 1970s, commercial paper and bank deposits began to be rated. As well, the major agencies began charging the issuers of bonds as well as investors — Moody's began doing this in 1970 — thanks in part to a growing free rider problem related to the increasing availability of inexpensive photocopy machines, and the increased complexity of the financial markets. Rating agencies also grew in size as the number of issuers grew, both in the United States and abroad, making the credit rating business significantly more profitable. In 2005 Moody's estimated that 90% of credit rating agency revenues came from issuer fees.

The end of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 led to the liberalization of financial regulations, and the global expansion of capital markets in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1975, the SEC changed its minimum capital requirements for broker-dealers, using bond ratings as a measurement. Moody's and nine other agencies (later five, due to consolidation) were identified by the SEC as "nationally recognized statistical ratings organizations" (NRSROs) for broker-dealers to use in meeting these requirements.

The 1980s and beyond saw the global capital market expand; Moody's opened its first overseas offices in Japan in 1985, followed by offices in the United Kingdom in 1986, France in 1988, Germany in 1991, Hong Kong in 1994, India in 1998 and China in 2001. The number of bonds rated by Moody's and the Big Three agencies grew substantially as well. As of 1997, Moody's was rating about $5 trillion in securities from 20,000 U.S. and 1,200 non-U.S. issuers. The 1990s and 2000s were also a time of increased scrutiny, as Moody's was sued by unhappy issuers and investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as criticism following the collapse of Enron, the U.S. subprime mortgage crisis and subsequent late-2000s financial crisis.

In 1998, Dun & Bradstreet sold the Moody's publishing business to Financial Communications (later renamed Mergent). Following several years of rumors and pressure from institutional shareholders, in December 1999 Moody's parent Dun & Bradstreet announced it would spin off Moody's Investors Service into a separate publicly traded company. Although Moody's had fewer than 1,500 employees in its division, it represented about 51% of Dun & Bradstreet profits in the year before the announcement. The spin-off was completed on September 30, 2000, and, in the half decade that followed, the value of Moody's shares improved by more than 300%.

Structured finance boom and after
Structured finance went from 28% of Moody's revenue in 1998 to almost 50% in 2007, and "accounted for pretty much all of Moody's growth" during that time. According to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Report, during the years 2005, 2006, and 2007, rating of structured finance products such as mortgage-backed securities made up close to half of Moody's rating revenues. From 2000 to 2007, revenues from rating structured financial instruments increased more than fourfold. However, there was some question about the models Moody's used to give structured products high ratings. In June 2005, shortly before the subprime mortgage crisis, Moody's updated its approach for estimating default correlation of non-prime/nontraditional mortgages involved in structured financial products like mortgage-backed securities and Collateralized debt obligations. Its new model was based on trends from the previous 20 years, during which time housing prices had been rising, mortgage delinquencies very low, and nontraditional mortgage products a very small niche of the market.

On July 10, 2007, in "an unprecedented move", Moody's downgraded 399 subprime mortgage-backed securities that had been issued the year before. Three months later, it downgraded another 2506 tranches ($33.4 billion). By the end of the crisis, Moody's downgraded 83% of all the 2006 Aaa mortgage backed security tranches and all of the Baa tranches.

In June 2013, Moody's Investor Service has warned that Thailand's credit rating may be damaged due to an increasingly costly rice-pledging scheme which lost 200 billion baht ($6.5 billion) in 2011–2012.

Sovereign downgrades
Moody's, along with the other major credit rating agencies, is often the subject of criticism from countries whose public debt is downgraded, generally claiming increased cost of borrowing as a result of the downgrade. Examples of sovereign debt downgrades that attracted significant media attention at the time include Australia in the 1980s, Canada and Japan in the 1990s, Thailand during the 1997 Asian financial crisis, and Portugal in 2011 following the European sovereign debt crisis.

Unsolicited ratings
Moody's has occasionally faced litigation from entities whose bonds it has rated on an unsolicited basis, and investigations concerning such unsolicited ratings. In October 1995, the school district of Jefferson County, Colorado sued Moody's, claiming the unsolicited assignment of a "negative outlook" to a 1993 bond issue was based on Jefferson County having selected S&P and Fitch to do its rating. Moody's rating raised the issuing cost to Jefferson County by $769,000. Moody's argued that its assessment was "opinion" and therefore constitutionally protected; the court agreed, and the decision was upheld on appeal.

In the mid-1990s, the U.S. Justice Department's antitrust division opened an investigation to determine whether unsolicited ratings amounted to an illegal exercise of market power, however the investigation was closed with no antitrust charges filed. Moody's has pointed out that it has assigned unsolicited ratings since 1909, and that such ratings are the market's "best defense against rating shopping" by issuers. In November 1999, Moody's announced it would begin identifying which ratings were unsolicited as part of a general move toward greater transparency. The agency faced a similar complaint in the mid-2000s from Hannover Re, a German insurer that lost $175 million in market value when its bonds were lowered to "junk" status. In 2005, unsolicited ratings were at the center of a subpoena by the New York Attorney General's office under Eliot Spitzer, but again no charges were filed.

Following the 2008 financial crisis, the SEC adopted new rules for the rating agency industry, including one to encourage unsolicited ratings. The intent of the rule is to counteract potential conflicts of interest in the issuer-pays model by ensuring a "broader range of views on the creditworthiness" of a security or instrument.

Alleged conflicts of interest
The "issuer pays" business model adopted in the 1970s by Moody's and other rating agencies has been criticized for creating a possible conflict of interest, supposing that rating agencies may artificially boost the rating of a given security in order to please the issuer. The SEC recently acknowledged, however, in its September 30, 2011 summary report of its mandatory annual examination of NRSROs that the subscriber-pays model under which Moody's operated prior to adopting the issuer pays model also "presents certain conflicts of interest inherent in the fact that subscribers, on whom the NRSRO relies, have an interest in ratings actions and could exert pressure on the NRSRO for certain outcomes". Other alleged conflicts of interest, also the subject of a Department of Justice investigation the mid-1990s, raised the question of whether Moody's pressured issuers to use its consulting services upon threat of a lower bond rating. Moody's has maintained that its reputation in the market is the balancing factor, and a 2003 study, covering 1997 to 2002, suggested that "reputation effects" outweighed conflicts of interest. Thomas McGuire, a former executive vice president, said in 1995 that: "[W]hat's driving us is primarily the issue of preserving our track record. That's our bread and butter".

In March 2021, Moody's reached a settlement with the European Union regarding alleged conflicts of interest. Moody's was fined 3.7 million euros ($4.35 million).

Financial crisis of 2007–2008
The global financial crisis of the late 2000s brought increased scrutiny to credit rating agencies' assessments of complex structured finance securities. Moody's and its close competitors were subject to criticism following large downgrade actions beginning in July 2007. According to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Report, 73% of the mortgage-backed securities Moody's had rated triple-A in 2006 were downgraded to junk by 2010. In its "Conclusions on Chapter 8", the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission stated: "There was a clear failure of corporate governance at Moody's, which did not ensure the quality of its ratings on tens of thousands of mortgage-backed securities and CDOs."

Faced with having to put more capital against lower rated securities, investors such as banks, pension funds and insurance companies sought to sell their residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) and collateralized debt obligation (CDO) holdings. The value of these securities held by financial firms declined, and the market for new subprime securitizations dried up. Some academics and industry observers have argued that the rating agencies' mass downgrades were part of the "perfect storm" of events leading up to the financial crisis in 2008.

In 2008, a study group established by the Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS), a committee of the Bank for International Settlements, found that rating agencies had underestimated the severity of the subprime mortgage crisis, as had "many market participants". According to the CGFS, significant contributing factors included "limited historical data" and an underestimation of "originator risk" factors. The CGFS also found that agency ratings should "support, not replace, investor due diligence" and that agencies should provide "better information on the key risk factors" of structured finance ratings. In October 2007, Moody's further refined its criteria for originators, "with loss expectations increasing significantly from the highest to the lowest tier". In May 2008, Moody's proposed adding "volatility scores and loss sensitivities" to its existing rankings. Although the rating agencies were criticized for "technical failings and inadequate resources", the FSB stated that the agencies' "need to repair their reputation was seen as a powerful force" for change. Moody's has in fact lost market share in certain sectors due to its tightened rating standards on some asset-backed securities, for example the commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) market in 2007.

In April 2013, Moody's, along with Standard & Poor's and Morgan Stanley, settled fourteen lawsuits filed by groups including Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank and King County, Washington. The lawsuits alleged that the agencies inflated their ratings on purchased structured investment vehicles.

In January 2017, Moody's agreed to pay nearly $864 million to settle with the Department of Justice, other state authorities and Washington. A fine of $437.5 million would be paid to the DOJ, and the remaining $426.3 million penalty would be split among 21 states and the District of Columbia. Then California Attorney General Kamala Harris and then Missouri Attorney General Joshua Hawley were among the state signatories to the settlement.

Global Credit Research
In March 2013 Moody's Investors Service published their report entitled Cash Pile Grows 10% to $1.45 Trillion; Overseas Holdings Continue to Expand in their Global Credit Research series, in which they examined companies they rate in the US non-financial corporate sector (NFCS). According to their report, by the end of 2012 the US NFCS held "$1.45 trillion in cash", 10% more than in 2011. At the end of 2011, US NFCS held $1.32 trillion in cash which was already a record level. "Of the $1.32 trillion for all the rated companies, Moody's estimates that $840 billion, or 58% of the total cash, is held overseas."

title: Moody's Ratings


text: Category:800 births

title: Category:800 births


text: Category:808 births

title: Category:808 births


text:
Melih Kibar

Melih Kibar (6 September 1951 – 7 April 2005) was a Turkish composer.

Biography
Born in Istanbul, he graduated from the German High School Istanbul and studied chemical engineering at Boğaziçi University. He received a Master's degree from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth.

At the age of eight, Kibar enrolled at the Conservatory of Istanbul Municipality. He started his musical career in the school years and won a first prize as composer at the Milliyet High School Music Contest in 1970. Until 1975 he worked with Timur Selçuk. One of his earliest compositions was Çoban Yıldızı, a jingle for Eurovision Song Contest national selection. Since 1975, he composed 273 tunes, 9 musicals and 32 film musicals in cooperation with various artists, in particular with lyricist Çiğdem Talu. In 1976, he received the Golden Orange prize for the soundtrack of the film "Hababam Sınıfı". Melih Kibar participated in various international festivals and was winner of many prizes in Turkey and abroad. At the Eurovision Song Contest 1986 held in Bergen, Norway, his song "Halley" and at the Eurovision Song Contest 1995 held in Dublin, Ireland, his another song "Sev!" represented Turkey.

Melih Kibar died of skin cancer on 7 April 2005 at a hospital in Istanbul. He was taken there two days before his death. He was laid to rest at Nakkaştepe Cemetery following the religious funeral held at Bebek Mosque. He is survived by his wife Ethel and his daughter Merve.

Discography

 * Yadigar, 2001
 * Saat Sabahın Dokuzu, 2003
 * Hababam Sınıfı-Merhaba, 2004

title: Melih Kibar


text: Category:845 births

title: Category:845 births


text: Category:835 deaths

title: Category:835 deaths


text: Category:880 births

title: Category:880 births


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/B1link82

In order to remain listed at Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: {insert UTC timestamp with }), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is:, 29 July 2024 (UTC).

 * (B1link82 | talk | contributions)
 * he was also prior User_talk:84.66.195.243

Description
Repeated uncivil edit summaries, 3RR violations, Edit warring, Copyvio. User has been repeatedly blocked for his actions in the past:
 * 1)
 * 2) * You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikipedia. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:18, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 3)
 * 4) * Your abuse of other users is unacceptable. You're temporarily blocked again - I suggest that you study Wikipedia:No personal attacks if and when you return. -- ChrisO 20:19, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 5)
 * 6) * You have been blocked for 24 hours for violating the three revert rule and no personal attacks policies. Please improve your future edits. --Slowking Man 23:11, Apr 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7)  - Note: this occurred DURING the RfC process.
 * 8) * You have been blocked for 24 hours under the three revert rule. If you wish to appeal please contact another administrator or the mailing list.Geni 21:05, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Evidence of disputed behavior
Examples of edit summaries: 08:44, 29 Mar 2005 British Airways (why edit it back you cunt) 09:44, 29 Mar 2005 United States (meh what a shit country) 13:34, 29 Mar 2005 United States (USA IS A SHIT COUNTRY FULL OF STUPID PRICKS WHO THINK THAT THE USA IS EVERYTHING) 14:15, 29 Mar 2005 Victoria Cross (its fucking plural) 16:20, 30 Mar 2005 Sidewalk (Nah i do haev apoint wiht this one, everyone else calls it a pavement and its easier to have one article) 17:42, 30 Mar 2005 Special Air Service (cock) 17:43, 30 Mar 2005 Datchet (FOR FUCKS SAKE DO YOU LIVE THERE?) 17:50, 30 Mar 2005 Datchet (YOU ARE A CUNT) 17:51, 30 Mar 2005 Special Air Service (They ARE the best regiment in the world, no1 disputes that! SO FUCK OFF) 17:53, 30 Mar 2005 Victoria Cross (IT IS A FACT WHY DELETE IT THIS IS AN ENCYCLOPEDIA FUCKING IDIOT) 17:55, 30 Mar 2005 Datchet (I FUCKING LIVE HERE) 13:53, 31 Mar 2005 Victoria Cross (dont edit it you cock) 15:04, 31 Mar 2005 England (Bobo192 is a fuckin cunt) 17:35, 3 Apr 2005 Special Air Service (tHE FUNCTION SECTION IS CRAP, ITS REPETATIVE AND POINTLESS soz bout caps) 12:06, 5 Apr 2005 Special Air Service (navy NOT marines, they are not battalion equivs, the function section is false and crap) 11:36, 6 Apr 2005 Special Air Service (if someone wants to know what a regiment is they can fucking click it) 18:00, 6 Apr 2005 Blink-182 (you do not understand do you? BLINK 182 CALL THEMSELEVES PUNK ROCK - I GUESS THEY ARE IN THE BEST POSITION TO KNOW! PLEASE DONT REVERT) 08:50, 7 Apr 2005 Blink-182 (interwiki links WTF? I KNOW WHAT I AM DOING I AM RIGHT YOU ARE WRONG? HAPPY? please acept that the band is punk rock and not pop punk, it is a FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Examples of edit warring and 3RR violations:

 * The edit history for Special Air Service shows massive reverting/warring by this user who refuses to concede a point not factually in question.

Examples of copyvio:

 * 1)
 * 2) * I noticed you added Sea Doo. Unfortunately, it appears to be a copyright violation. Please read Wikipedia:Copyright_FAQ to get a better understanding of what can be accepted and what can't. Cheers. Burgundavia 02:29, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Examples of deleting and altering other users' comments and votes from polls:

 *
 *
 *

Examples of vandalising user pages:

 *
 *
 *

Applicable policies
{list the policies that apply to the disputed conduct}
 * Three-revert rule
 * No personal attacks
 * Civility
 * Copyright FAQ (not really a policy page but Copyvio is against policy)
 * Profanity
 * Neutral point of view
 * Wikiquette
 * Revert

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
(provide diffs and links)
 * My first direct comment.
 * My edit summary 17:54, 5 Apr 2005 Alkivar (rv, your step by step reverting each step counts as a revert b1link82. You have therefore violated 3RR's intent, watch it or be expecting another block soon.)
 * RedWordSmith comment
 * After this exchange, I rewrote the Special Air Service article incorporating many of his changes and left him this message. He has proceeded to revert almost everything not written by him numerous times (although he has kept the basic layout). I respectfully suggest that, while he may have read a lot about the SAS, he knows very little about the British Army as a whole and refuses to accept anything he has not personally read, which is not in the spirit of Wikipedia.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute
(sign with ~ )
 * ALKIVAR ™ 19:31, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Necrothesp 22:49, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary
(sign with ~ )
 * He's doing the same revert war/personal attack thing at Talk:Blink-182. Also see the history for the blink-182 article. Rhobite 20:22, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * I concur. It also has a lucrative sideline in blatant vandalism: Wikipedia:Banning_policy | United_States | United_States | United_States | United_States | United_States | United_States | United_States | George_W._Bush -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 21:16, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I also concur with this. Burgundavia 21:54, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey, it's a Blink-182 fan who has a fetish for the SAS! Sounds like a wonderful person. Hey, it's a fifteen year old Blink-182 fan who has a fetish for the SAS! Sounds like a wonderful person.-Ashley Pomeroy 22:12, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * B1link82, slow down, it seems that you're behavious has mainly "gotten up people's noses" because you delete or change minor or petty points in articles. You need to respect people's contributions to Wikipedia, and rarely do this. Is Blink-182 punk rock or pop punk? If you truly feel this has been miscategorized, say so on the talk page, ask for contributions, then either edit it or put in a special Blink-182 disputed categorization paragraph. It will look, frankly, stupid, but if you really feel that way, that's what you should do. Music categorizations are largely a marketing tool anyway. If you feel that the colour of the SAS cap is misrepresented, do the same, but again, it's stupid, colours are a very cultural thing, eg, Japanese don't have a yellow (I think). You're not acting as part of the culture, you're acting against it. When you change someone's contribution, no matter how small, you're at least wrapping them on the knuckles, and if this happened en-masse Wikipedia wouldn't work. If you feel you need to make deletions and modifications, show that you've put some effort and thought in. If you do this, you'll realize what you've been doing is irrelevant. I concur that user B1link82 needs to have his behaviour modified, and regret using 30 mins of my life admonishing some guy. JamesHoadley 13:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I concur; this user's incivility and acts of vandalism need to be dealt with. -- ChrisO 15:26, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I also concur with the summary, and I have my own user page vandalised and my comments edited by the user in question. Kiand 15:41, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I also concur. We worked together on Blink 182, and he has shown a complete lack of willingness to compromise. Doesn't seem to understand that articles are not his, and his alone to edit. Lan3y - Talk 19:21, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, as I am listed among the numbskulls without knowledge of Blink-182, I am perhaps horribly biased against him. That, or the fact that his edits are completely without merit, and he's seemingly obsessed with Blink-182 not being Pop-punk, for reasons unseen.  It's stunningly obvious that this user is not following the rules of Wikipedia and is, in fact, flagrantly violating them.--The Grza  21:50, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * I've run across him a couple of times, and my experience fits the already overwhelming evidence above. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 21:13, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Quite bad in dealing with people . Pavel Vozenilek 22:01, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Response
This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

Where do I start, well i'll go with the Special Air Service article. Users including but not limited to User:Necrothesp and User:Alkivar are some of the stupidest people I have ever come across. Not only that but when told they are wrong they still refuse to accept it. For example Necrothesp would have you belive that the SAS beret is not sand colour when it clearly is AND it is for a reason - the desert creation. He would also like to make it clear that a battalion is the same as a regiment when obviousl it is not (see the paras). For some reason which I do nt understand User:Alkivar supports these stupid suggestions. Now, on to the Blink 182 article. Users including but not limited to User:Rhobite, User:Greedyredbag, User:Lan3y, User:TheGrza, User:Alkivar (again) and User:Katefan0 also show their obvious lack of knowledge. Claiming a band that has always been known as punk rock - would the be on kerrang if they weren't? - are now pop-punk.. It is fuckign stuid to think that. The wikipedia text invites me to expand upopn artilces and change them for the better, I correct peoples mistakes but they are upset that they have been proved wrong and change them back, where is the sense it that? These people should be told that they are fucking. Continuing with this article, I quote "Hey, it's a Blink-182 fan who has a fetish for the SAS! Sounds like a wonderful person.-Ashley Pomeroy 22:12, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)". I see my noble friend has pointed out I am a Blink 182 fan, that is obvious from my username. Furthermore he breeches the 'no personal attacks' and I am requesting a 24 hour ban for such behaviour. I actually laugh at you people who have nothing betetr to do than discuss people you do not know and who are more intelligent than you. I am 15 and I am obviously more intelligent that the lot of you (any of you Americans - that might explain it). For tose who are offering outside summaries, I hold nothing against you, you are going by the lies you see here from geeks who have nothing better to do than complain about better people than themeselves. User:Pd THOR and User:Ben W Bell you are right to assume that im the fucking prick these guys are making me out to be. However, I am just a normal person with a particular interest in the SAS and Blink 182 and was helping to create a beter online site. Obviously only people who think they know what they are talking about but do not are allowed here. People use shit slang like 'edit wars' and '3RR' like they are in junior school. I am asking you people to look outside at the normal people in life and to get a fucking life as the majority of you need one. I laughed out loud when I saw the bloke who was interested in Church Architecture!!! If I was in charge I would ban User:Alkivar for life becuase he is a fucking cock sucking prick and put User:Necrothesp on some sort of edit preivew. Congratulate me on standing up to those dick heads and aapologise to me whilst encouraging me to stay. I know I did muck around a bit for a laugh, but that is not why I am writing this (I'm on a break from revision), I am writing to show that the big guys try and kick out the little guys, who are often right, and in my case more intelligent and more kowledgeable than most of the people on here - I don't often boast about being clever but I am here. Now, I am off to revise and become a better person than most of you, tara.

--B1link82 11:40, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Follow up - User:John Fader is also one of the pricks on the site, he reverts a perfectly reasonable edit as the user User:Alkivar was breaking the rules of the page. I have had the undesirable pleasure of working on the same article as User:John Fader before and he is worse than User:Necrothesp.

--B1link82 11:51, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Follow up - User:Deathphoenix has a very good idea of what is happening and is much more open minded.

--B1link82 15:31, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA 9 people with nothing better to do! COCKS!

--B1link82 12:38, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):

Outside view
This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

{Add summary here, but you must use the endorsement section below to sign. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}

 * I became aware of this user when he created what I felt to be a poorly constructed article (Foreign Military One) and linked it to pages I was watching at the time. Before I added any criticism (Talk:Foreign Military One), I looked through the user's previous work and edits.  My immediate worry was that if I were to change any of "this member's articles" both my integrity and articles would come under their slander.  My question posed was responded with insult, and my politely constructed response was duly ignored despite evidence that the user was actively working on wiki at the time.  Based on the user's track record, they are slanderous, vandalistic, unrelenting, and wholly immature; whether they need to be using wikipaedia (a community) and/or editing articles is seriously in question.  —  THOR 23:37, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that when this article was nominated for VfD, he removed the VfD header.   ALKIVAR ™ 07:29, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not involved in the dispute, but in the short time this user has been registered he has done nothing but cause trouble within the Wikipedia. He blatantly reverts changes calling them vandalism without listening to other points of view on the matter. While it's possible some of the stuff he alters is then factually correct he makes no effort to support the changes with reference other than comments like 'I know far more than you ever could.' His changes, edit wars and personal attacks against anyone who doesn't see the world his way are not in the spirit of the Wikipedia and is bringing the name into disrepute. Ben W Bell 08:42, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):

Outside view 2

 * I first became aware of this user on the Talk:Victoria Cross page, where I've seen him engage in mildly combative behaviour. I've looked over his contributions, and I think B1link82 can potentially be a good contributor, but I think he takes things personally and feels that he owns his contributions. Remember that once you submit something to Wikipedia it is no longer yours. Also, if you try to be more civil to your fellow Wikipedians and not take things too personally, you can become a valuable member of the Wikipedia community. --Deathphoenix 15:18, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * After seeing your other edits, it definitely seems that you don't know how to be civil. I've seen users blocked for much less vandalism that you've done so far. --Deathphoenix 00:36, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):

Arbitration requested
Due to B1link82's insulting response here and his vandalism of user pages today, I have requested arbitration against him. See Requests for arbitration. Rhobite 17:36, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, considering he's now vandalizing this page, he just called 9 people "cocks", how long is this going to go on for? JamesHoadley 15:31, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * He might've been a good user. But I have a zero tolerance on vandalism (especially of RFC and RFAr pages) and calling people "Cocks" isn't helpful either. If Blink wants any sort of support he should try to discuss things with people instead of calling them names for changes his edits. Starting friendly discussion is much more likely to give results. Mgm|(talk) 21:04, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

19:14, 17 Apr 2005, Neutrality blocked (expires indefinite) {Vulgar vandalism, trolling, personal attacks.)

B1link82 has thus been informally banned from Wikipedia. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:40, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/B1link82


text: Category:729 deaths

title: Category:729 deaths


text:
User talk:Siren-Fr

As you may or may not be aware, Image:Autofellatio 2.jpg is up for deletion. I'm never one to electioneer, and I deplore the necessity of contacting you, but Achilles has contacted all the "delete" voters from the previous autofellatio image debate; and since that has already been done, I didn't think fairness would be served if the "keep" voters were not also contacted. I have attempted to contact only those people who have not voted in the current debate, but the information was hard to sift through by hand and I may have made a mistake. If I have, I apologize. Cheers to you! Demi T/C 19:32, 2005 Apr 7 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Siren-Fr


text: Category:586 deaths

title: Category:586 deaths


text: Category:577 deaths

title: Category:577 deaths


text:
Golden Faith

Golden Faith is a 2002 Hong Kong television drama produced by TVB, starring Gallen Lo, Deric Wan, Jessica Hsuan, Raymond Lam, Anne Heung, Myolie Wu, Tavia Yeung, Michelle Ye, Paul Chun, Lau Dan, Shek Sau, Kwok Fung, Lau Kong, and Gigi Wong. It was Gallen Lo's final performance in a dramatic epic before leaving TVB, Deric Wan's comeback role, Myolie Wu's breakthrough, and Felix Lok's first major role. It was billed as "a major production from the makers of At the Threshold of an Era".

Synopsis
Ivan Ting Sin-boon (Gallen Lo) is orphaned at young age and was adopted by Ting Wing-pong (Paul Chun), the CEO of Gold Smith Group, a jeweller in Hong Kong. His real name is Chung Tin-yan and his family died in a ship wreck when he was a child coming to Hong Kong. Ivan grew up knowing the business ethics his father went through as he built his empire, which included smuggling and money laundering, but never got involved in the operations himself. No one knows of his true identity, not even his adopted mother and siblings.

On a trip to Perth, Australia, he meets Rachel Ching Tin-lam (Jessica Hsuan). After a few incidents, they are brought together. As they are about to begin a relationship together, Ivan is called back to Hong Kong due to one of his father's old business partners requesting help. During this incident, he gets into trouble with the law; he crosses paths with an undercover police officer, Chung Sau-hong (Deric Wan) who is out to put an end to their illegal operations. Ivan is soon arrested for what seems like an illegal transaction between himself and his father's old partner but in reality he simply gives money without actually taking the "goods". When he faces his case in court, the prosecutor is none other than Rachel. After clearing the misunderstandings, he manages to embark on a relationship with her.

However, in the middle of their relationship, Ivan is faced with more and more crises. On one hand, he believes he killed Law Kai-cheung (Kwok Fung) while trying to save his sister, Yan (Myolie Wu). On the other, he is constantly helping his family avoid legal prosecution due to their past. This puts a strain on their relationship.

Ivan's good friend, Sabrina Kwai Lai-fu (Anne Heung), who loves Ivan with all her heart, is constantly tormented by Jonathan Hung Pak-to (Shek Sau), his rival business partner. Jonathan steals a precious crown meant from Gold Smith and she is forced to make a sacrifice of sleeping with him to get it back. Eventually, Jonathan pushes her too far and she kills him. As a result, Ivan decides to fully give up his relationship with Rachel because of obligation to Sabrina.

When his father dies, he is left with a majority of the family fortune and is the principal stakeholder, making him CEO and Chair of Gold Smith. This upsets his second-uncle greatly. His younger brother Oscar, who studied in America, comes back to help in the family business despite initially hesitating and preferring to pursue a career in marine biology.

Oscar accidentally hits someone with his car one day and their second uncle uses this incident to twist Oscar's mind into hating Ivan, initiating a power struggle between the two brothers that will lead to Ivan's true identity being revealed. Oscar is not pleased that a non-Ting member holds the ruling power in the company. Ivan agrees to allow Oscar to be the new CEO with a few stipulations.

Their second uncle continues to scheme, attempting to revert the company back into the money laundering scheme it used to be. Eventually Rachel goes out with Hong and he is revealed to be Ivan's younger brother who was thought to have died at sea. Sabrina leaves Ivan due to being constantly reminded of her time with Pak-to. Soon after, Ivan and Hong reconcile, leading to Ivan and Rachel's increased interaction once again. She starts to understand his complex life and realizes why he made the choices he made and how it burdens him so. Ivan's personality makes her realize who she truly loved and she reconsiders her relationship with Hong. Meanwhile, Oscar is driven further and further down the wrong path by their second uncle.

Eventually, Oscar realizes the error of his ways and Ivan regains control of Gold Smith, exposing their second uncle. Once he realizes his late-father's dream for the company, he is free to pursue his relation with Rachel once again. In the end, Ivan and Rachel live happily ever after in Perth.

Main cast

 * Gallen Lo as Ivan Ting
 * Deric Wan as Chung Sau-hong
 * Jessica Hsuan as Rachel Ching
 * Raymond Lam as Oscar Ting
 * Myolie Wu as Ting Sin-yan
 * Michelle Ye as Rain Ching
 * Tavia Yeung as Kiko Chung
 * Anne Heung as Sabrina Kwai
 * Paul Chun as Ting Wing-pong
 * Gigi Wong as Ebel Ting
 * Felix Lok as Ting Wing-tung
 * Kwok Fung Law Kai-cheung
 * Shek Sau as Jonathan Hung

Additional cast

 * Benz Hui as Henry Kam
 * Wilson Tsui as Jack Chiu
 * Lau Dan as Chung Wai-kuk
 * Lau Kong as Ching Choi-san
 * Patricia Liu as Moon
 * Ron Ng as Kwan Siu-chau
 * Carlo Ng as Sunny Leung
 * Power Chan as Szeto Kai

Cameos

 * Bernice Liu as Alice Yiu
 * Law Lok-lam as Howard Yiu
 * Leila Tong
 * Kenneth Ma as Doctor
 * Gregory Charles Rivers as Jewelry Design Instructor

title: Golden Faith


text: Category:646 deaths

title: Category:646 deaths


text: Category:627 births

title: Category:627 births


text: Category:685 births

title: Category:685 births


text: Category:684 births

title: Category:684 births


text:
User talk:199.216.192.2

May 2023
Please refrain from attempting to make unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been [ disallowed by an edit filter.] If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 22:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Last Flight (book), you may be blocked from editing. 74.73.224.126 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

September 2023
Hello, I'm --WikiUser1234945--. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Gage and Tollner—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. --WikiUser1234945-- (talk) 16:14, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Gage and Tollner. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. --WikiUser1234945-- (talk) 16:18, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:199.216.192.2


text: Category:690 deaths

title: Category:690 deaths


text: Category:530 deaths

title: Category:530 deaths


text: Category:516 births

title: Category:516 births


text: Category:482 deaths

title: Category:482 deaths


text: Category:418 deaths

title: Category:418 deaths


text: Category:433 deaths

title: Category:433 deaths


text:
Talk:Ghettopoly

Untitled
Monopoly encourages capitalism? I always thought that Monopoly satirized real estate moguls, railroad barons and other monopolists. After all it did take off in the Great Depression, and then there's the caricature of Rich Uncle Pennybags, and of course the title, "Monopoly." It's not like they named it Captains of Industry. it is cool. NTK 19:39, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page has a bad case of WP:WEASEL
There is "Some thought", "Some have said"

Although there are many references in the external links section, I think each statement of the article should cite sources 70.80.113.243 04:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Modified celebrity names
On the ghetto and redneckopoly websites, they use celebrity names for false endorsements that are modified so that the real-life celebs can't sue, but the difference is only within a letter or two. Sometimes they use entirely different names that rhyme exactly with the real names, such as:

 * Hustle Simmons = Russell Simmons (Ghettopoly)

 * B. Diddy = P. Diddy (Ghettopoly)

 * Master B. = Master P.

 * Rusta Rhyme = Busta Rhymes (Ghettopoly)

 * Willie Nelsun = Willie Nelson (Redneckopoly)

 * Barth Brooks = Garth Brooks (Redneckopoly)

 * Dolly Pardon = Dolly Parton (Redneckopoly)

 * Jeff Foxworthless = Jeff Foxworthy (Redneckopoly)

--Crackthewhip775 (talk) 04:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Ghettopoly. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110728172918/http://www.websupp.org/data/DRI/1:03-cv-00482-58-DRI.pdf to http://www.websupp.org/data/DRI/1:03-cv-00482-58-DRI.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 11:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Additional links removed as per WP:EL Rayman60 (talk) 06:42, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

 * "Ghettopoly game sparks outrage" — BBC
 * "Ghettopoly game called racist" — MSNBC
 * "Hasbro: Do not pass go, Ghettopoly" — USA Today

title: Talk:Ghettopoly


text:
Talk:Munchkin (card game)

Expansions table
Anyone interested in transfering and inserting the adjustable expansions table from the German Munchkin article into this one? Yours --Lino Wirag (talk) 12:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Unnamed topic (1)
I loved the game, the card game that is. It have the interesting of RPGs like vampire, but I would rather find one a little more similar to White Wolfs WereWolf. I will have to admit thou- -This is like how people play D&D. I am interested in a team game that does not get cornie. This is D&D, vampire, and all- -with the backstabbing of other players. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alnair1 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 7 April 2005 (UTC)

Unnamed topic (2)
I believe, Munchkin Bites! and Munchkin Fu are meant to be played as extension with the original Munchkin. Perhaps the article should be changed to reflect this... Looked it up, article is right. It is common practice to play the different versions together (and this is also intended), but officially they are different versions. --84.178.110.162 (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Unnamed topic (3)
last contribution by User:Jakey spake is not a vandalism. Maybe not in sync with Wikipedia quality standards, but relevant to the topic. --Aou 13:17, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Unnamed topic (4)
Added Munchkin 5 "De-Ranged" and Epic Munckin, although I don't think that is a product as such as a set of official house rules for extended play? FelixNZ 05:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Isn't Epic Munchkin a rules expansion included in Munchkin Blender?
 * Also, though it hasnt been confirmed online anywhere I know of, Steve Jackson has said at Origins 2007 that the next themed Munchkin set is going to be Pirate-based. 69.133.194.101 (talk) 19:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Munchkin game cover.jpg
Image:Munchkin game cover.jpg 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Class card rules?
In the wiki it says "If a player draws a class card face up, he/she automatically becomes that class. If they already have one in play, he/she may choose to replace their current class and discard it, or choose to place the new class in their hand for later." I've read through my rule sheet again, and checked the official Munchkin website, and haven't found anything that says you are forced to be the class if it is drawn face up and you have no class. Whoever added that, where did you get it from? 98.247.122.45 (talk) 06:40, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
 * You and the rules are right and the edit one year ago by FallenAngelII is wrong. I have corrected the phrase now. There was also a couple of other edits by the same user, you might want to check those. --Bamsefar75 (talk) 16:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Time
The article says that one game takes approximately 45-60 minutes, which, most of the times, is only for extremly short games. I would suggest that we replace it with eg. >45 minutes or so, much because the gameplay may take only 45 minutes, or hold on in about 8 hours or so. I see this as a mostly harmless change, and change it imediately --SakJur (talk) 10:59, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Which version of Munchkin have you been playing? I've yet to play even an epic game with multiple decks that lasts more than an hour.  A note that a session can take several hours with enough cards and players is sufficient. Thatfield977 (talk) 19:34, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Full Rules Totally Necessary?
Is there a particular reason it's necessary to have pretty much the entire rules for the game here? Besides it being a potential copyright issue, there are multiple inaccuracies in the "gameplay" section. Petronivs (talk) 15:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

There's absolutely no reason for them. They're available online. This isn't a How To article, it's an encyclopedia entry. A basic description is all that's needed, although I can see the reason for listing races and classes in each expansion, with a short blurb. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.62.7.201 (talk) 15:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

 * I trimmed a significant amount of excessive gameplay detail out of the article; it might still need more work. Some guy (talk) 21:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

How old is this game?
The lead vaguely suggests through an award that this was a 2001 game. The lead also mentions that 70% of SJG's sales were from this game in 2007, but does not indicate whether that figure is a growing or shrinking trend. Some more real-world context would be great to have in this article. Ham Pastrami (talk) 15:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

BGG list publishing year of Munchkin as 2001. and I remember playing it at Insomnia before it closed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.118.16.93 (talk) 12:53, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Red Dragon Inn
Other Munchkin themed games did not list https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/249578/red-dragon-inn-allies-spyke-and-flower 75.118.16.93 (talk) 12:58, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Munchkin-themed comics?
There is also a Munchkin Comic Book Series that is based on a game published by Boom! Studios. It has 25 issues published between 2015-2017. I wonder if this information needs to be added? Toaddoesnot (talk) 00:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

 * Please stop with the unsourced listcruft. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 15:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Munchkin (card game)


text: User talk:72.20.132.7

title: User talk:72.20.132.7


text: User talk:217.43.199.186

title: User talk:217.43.199.186


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The trots

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. Jinian 21:34, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The trots
Dicdef. Guettarda 19:41, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete slang dicdef, and a poorly done one, at that. - DavidWBrooks 19:49, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete obviously just put in as a sophomoric joke. RussBlau 20:20, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's a real slang term. But Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Uncle G 19:19, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)
 * Delete or move to Wikitionary. --Wtshymanski 05:22, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not worth the bother of transwikification. There are at least two other meanings of the word.  And Wiktionary is simply better at this sort of thing.  Let Wiktionary come up with an entry from scratch.  Uncle G 19:19, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)
 * Just Delete it Asriel86 05:57, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to diarrhea.
 * Redirect to diarrhea and delete. Capitalistroadster 10:35, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * You've just made up a new entry for WP:GVFD. ☺ Uncle G 19:19, 2005 Apr 8 (UTC)
 * Redirect Meelar (talk) 15:37, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
User:HochauerW

Walter Hochauer

--HochauerW (talk) 20:48, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

title: User:HochauerW


text:
Category talk:Symphonies

I think we need guidelines for this page. I don't think we can put all 41 of Mozart's symphonies in this category; rather, a Category:Mozart symphonies would be appropriate. We need a set limit; perhaps composers with less than nine symphonies (so that Beethoven gets his own category :) go in this category, while other composers get their own categories? ugen 64 19:41, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Symphonies


text: User talk:68.194.165.98

title: User talk:68.194.165.98


text:
Dumbarton (disambiguation)

Dumbarton is a town in Scotland. It may also refer to:

Associations with Scotland

 * The County of Dumbarton in Scotland
 * Dumbarton (Scottish Parliament constituency)
 * Dumbarton (UK Parliament constituency), a former UK Parliament constituency.
 * Dumbarton (district), the local authority which covered the town and surrounding area between 1975 and 1996.
 * Dumbarton F.C., a Scottish Second Division football (soccer) team
 * The "Kingdom of Dumbarton" is a description of the Kingdom of Strathclyde, a post-Roman kingdom based on Dumbarton Rock and the valley of the River Clyde in Britain, absorbed into the Kingdom of Scotland in the 11th Century.

Associations with the New World

 * Dumbarton, Western Australia, locality near Toodyay, Western Australia
 * Dumbarton Parish, New Brunswick a civil parish in Canada
 * Dumbarton Bridge (California), a bridge across the San Francisco Bay in California
 * Dumbarton Bridge (Washington, D.C.), a bridge across Rock Creek Park in Washington, D.C.
 * Dumbarton Oaks, in Georgetown, Washington, D.C.
 * Dumbarton House, in Georgetown, Washington, D.C.
 * Concerto in E-flat (Dumbarton Oaks), a 1938 concerto by Igor Stravinsky
 * Dumbarton Oaks Conference, the meeting where the United Nations was formulated and negotiated
 * Dumbarton, Virginia, a census-designated place and neighborhood in Henrico County, Virginia

Title

 * Earl of Dumbarton, title for son of Prince Harry

title: Dumbarton (disambiguation)