text:
Talk:Heather Stilwell

Biography assessment rating comment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Edofedinburgh 14:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Tone down the rhetoric, please.
"Anti-Gay" and "banned homosexual activities" are inflammatory, exaggerate, and misrepresent.

Mrs. Stilwell is an evangelical Christian, and as such, seeks to obey God and emulate the life of Jesus Christ. As such, to be "anti-gay" would be to breach the Great Commandment. The CHP would not "ban" homosexual activity, but it would set things straight by acting to disallow the promotion of a behaviour that has ample medical documentation as an unhealthy behaviour, while maintaining compassion for those trapped in the behaviour. Current party leader Ron Gray has stated, numerous times: "If they want to be left alone to suffer privately, we would leave them alone. If they want help, we would offer them help." The small number of militants, however, would be disallowed from aggressively promoting the behaviour and misrepresenting it as a viable lifestyle, and the CHP would also uphold the right of free speech to tell the truth about it. Sadly, militant homosexuals who clamor for tolerance are themselves intolerant of opposition to their statements, and try to shut down those who speak in opposition.

--Response--
When Stilwell and fellow Trustee Pickering were sued personally by a teacher under a collective agreement to ensure a harassment free workplace, Stilwell was quoted as saying: "I reserved the right to say that homosexual behavior is wrong". As such, it is fair comment to say that she is indeed "anti-gay". As for me, I reserve the right to say that Mrs Stilwell appears to be a militant Christian who is intolerant of others and who will stop at nothing to promote her own personal beliefs. Let look at the facts:

1) she has undertaken an active role in a myriad of organizations whose main purpose is to oppose EQUAL rights for gay and lesbian individuals. One such organization is Campaign Life Coalition whose position reads: "To have become a homosexual is to have acquired a moral disorder. To indulge in homosexual activity is to pervert human sexuality. So-called sexual orientation should not be placed in the Canada Human Rights Act; homosexuals should be permitted neither in the army nor in the clergy; homosexual unions' must not be recognized as 'marriages';

2) after removing a child from a gay teacher's classroom, she was sued personally and her school board's actions were found to be guilty under the BC Human Rights Act;

3) she has been quoted as saying "All law imposes morality. I believe I have just as much rights as the pro-abortionists to impose my morality on society";

4) she fought for and ended up establishing a 'traditional school' at a time when the school district was suffering from significant funding cutbacks for other publically funded programmes in the district;

5) she opposed the teaching of safe sex practices to students in the district, even though they suffer from a high level of teen pregnancy;

6) she opposed library books dealing with other religions and cultures;

7)she opposed learning materials designed to teach tolerance via a reflection of the diversity present in today's society;

8) after the Supreme Court of Canada disallowed the School Board a religious basis for opposing these books, Mrs Stilwell opposed them by applying such specious rigorous standards that the Bible itself would not have been able to pass them;

9) she prevented members of a legally constituted provinicial political party from speaking at an all-candidates meeting.

Stilwell has a right to speak her opinion on all these matters, but she seems to have made a career out of trying to silence all those who don't share her philosophy. That is real intolerance.--BillC38 08:09, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Rebuttal to response:
''"I reserved the right to say that homosexual behavior is wrong". As such, it is fair comment to say that she is indeed "anti-gay".''

I reserve the right to say that drinking and driving, murder, theft, perjury are wrong. So, call me intolerant and militant, too. I am going to oppose people who have fun drinking and driving, committing murder, theft and perjury. Heather and I are not promoting our personal beliefs: we are obeying our Holy God who prohibits murder, theft, perjury and homosexual behaviour. The American Psychiatric Association held homosexual behaviour as a deviant behaviour; the only reason they withdrew it is because, in 1973, militant homosexual activists threatened physical violence if the APA did not change its official stand. The activists didn't come up with reasoned medical or scientific evidence - they resorted to bully tactics. Therefore, the APA stand of today is not legitimate, and in fact, most psychiatrists still regard homosexuality as deviant behaviour.

she has undertaken an active role in a myriad of organizations whose main purpose is to oppose EQUAL rights for gay and lesbian individuals.

Homosexuals do have equal rights. Militant homosexuals are demanding special rights. They do not require marriage in order to do what they want to do - no law stops them from being friends, living together, or engaging in their behaviour with one another. Marriage is a special institution that was initiated by God with Adam and Eve in order to furnish a stable relationship between a man and woman and an ideal environment to raise children. When that man-woman relationship is abused with sexual deviancies of the many kinds, that ideal environment that is crucial for children ceases to exist.

Homosexuals are only 1-2 percent of the North American population. Children are 100% of the future. Why must we sacrifice our children to satisfy these homosexuals when most of what they're asking for they already have, and the rest is harmful to the children?

My church, which obeys God and not mere mankind, will never marry homosexuals, and I will stand behind my pastor if he is challenged on it. It had better not be challenged, because the Liberal government has claimed (with little credibility) that religious freedom will be protected to refuse to perform such marriages!

RUBBISH! You and Heather Stilwell are both hypocrites. Yes, the Bible condemns homosexuality. It also condemns working on the sabbath (the Ten Commandments), and women teaching and having authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11-14), plus many other actions that conservative Christians routinely ignore.Hellbound Hound (talk) 06:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

she has been quoted as saying "All law imposes morality. I believe I have just as much rights as the pro-abortionists to impose my morality on society"

If the pro-abortionists claim the right to impose their morality, then everyone with a contrary point of view has the equal right.

she fought for and ended up establishing a 'traditional school' at a time when the school district was suffering from significant funding cutbacks for other publically funded programmes in the district

A school, which I said, had more parents wanting to put children into it than they could possibly accommodate - if the school had unused capacity, only then would you have a legitimate point. If other schools are under used, then perhaps some of them should be converted to traditional so that more children can be accommodated and the rest can be better utilized.

she opposed the teaching of safe sex practices to students in the district, even though they suffer from a high level of teen pregnancy

Safe sex is a misnomer. The only safe sex is abstinence until marriage then faithfulness. Condoms have natural pores in them large enough for hundreds of HIV cells to pass through simultaneously. Giving a kid a condom is giving them a false sense of security, because they won't contain the HIV, preventing it from moving from seminal or vaginal fluids to the other person. Uganda is a perfect example of success: they're promoting chastity, while the countries around them are promoting condoms; Uganda alone in Africa has reversed its AIDS infection rate.

she opposed learning materials designed to teach tolerance via a reflection of the diversity present in today's society

Giving children materials that "normalize" homosexual households is not teaching tolerance - it is spreading the illusion that such households are normal and are not dysfunctional. Since most homosexuals have hundreds of partners in their lifetime, and most violence to homosexuals comes from other homosexuals during the acts of "sex", it is hardly fair to children to portray such households as normal. The children must be taught first not to feel any hatred, and second, to remember the ideal and offer friendship; heterosexual parents can offer their example of God's creation of man-woman relationships to assure the children who have homosexual households of God's beautiful creation and reinforce to their children not to exhibit hatred.

she prevented members of a legally constituted provinicial political party from speaking at an all-candidates meeting.

Specify. Was she allowing only candidates and randomly-selected questioners to speak? Was she preventing an outburst by those not recognized or not part of the random selection? I would like to know the details of this event, and I may or may not choose to contact Heather and ask her what her recollection is. The truth is often somewhere in between.

I myself have been a candidate for office. At my very first all-candidates forum, the press reports indicate I was being heckled for my socially conservative views. Even if I had heard them (and I did not), it wouldn't have bothered me one bit, because they weren't heckling me; they were heckling my Lord and Saviour. He took nails, thorns, piercing by spear and mocking, and He took it for me, and if anyone mocks me, I accept it with honour because I know they're mocking the One who my life belongs to. If people have an opinion that differs from mine, they can speak it all they want (without profanities, if they wish to retain their dignity and civility!), and I reserve the right to speak my opinion, too. Voltaire, an atheist, also defended the speech of those he didn't agree with.

Heather is definitely not homophobic (I know you didn't say she was) and neither am I. A phobia is an irrational fear or hatred. Since we neither fear nor hate homosexuals, and since we only reject homosexual behaviour, and that rejection is reasoned obedience of a superior wisdom, it is not a phobia.

GBC 05:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Heh. "Condoms have natural pores in them large enough for hundreds of HIV cells to pass through simultaneously." You got some credible evidence on that? "Since most homosexuals have hundreds of partners in their lifetime, and most violence to homosexuals comes from other homosexuals during the acts of "sex"." Again, where are you pulling this out from? As a faithful straight Roman Catholic, I don't think you know what happens during gay sex outside of hearsay. …Markaci 2005-07-22 T 10:41:33 Z

 * The inherent, naturally occurring flaws in latex are up to 5 microns (0.0002 inches) in size. Sperm cells are 50 microns in diameter, and the AIDS virus is 0.1 microns in size. -- “C.M. Roland, Ph.D., Editor, Rubber Chemistry and Technology and Head of the Polymer Properties Section, Naval Research Laboratory. Washington Times, April 22, 1992.”  ................  what this shows is that sperm are too large to get through an unripped condom, but the flaws are 50 times wider than an AIDS virus. Exact measurements. Is Dr. Roland's information credible enough?  I hope so! As to "hearsay", I haven't heard "hearsay" of alternatives; PARDON BLUNTNESS - STOP READING THIS PARAGRAPH UNLESS YOU'RE READY - just where is a male homosexual's member supposed to fit inside another male other than the place where the sun doesn't shine? - physically damaging, unhealthy, and it is heart-rending, "cringe-some", and grief-striking to those of us not into this kind of behaviour. Please don't deny this horrific physical abuse - no wonder so many homosexuals suffer clinical depression - they're hurting badly, even if they won't admit it, and the bravado of their "pride" days could be, for some of those paraders, a desperate reach of denial. GBC 15:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * GBC, whatever you believe is your business, and your business alone. I won't say anything about your beliefs. But Wikipedia is not the place to push those beliefs, no matter how well-founded you may believe them to be. NPOV is one of the most important tenets of Wikipedia, and much of what you have recently been posting here is clearly not NPOV. If you want to share your view, or the view of your church, on LGBT rights with others, then by all means do start a blog or any other kind of website. But Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia, is not the place for those views. Wikipedia is about describing phenomena, not about judging them (either positively or negatively). Other than that, do remain involved in Wikipedia, because the remainder of your edits is very constructive to Wikipedia. Aecis 11:13, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

There are many flaws with Roland's study, the greatest of which is that he used rubber gloves as his test material. Condoms are manufactured of a significantly superior latex. --Underwearman 19:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Google hits
A google search for "Heather Stilwell" Surrey produces 290 hits.

A google search for "heather stilwell" Surrey homophobia OR homophobe OR homophobic OR anti-gay OR intolerant OR intolerance produces 65 hits.

--BillC38 05:30, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Surrey traditional school
On a visit to Mrs. Stilwell, she shared with me the experience she and others had in attaining the founding of this school. They prevailed upon the school board to establish one, and once it was established, so many parents applied to have their children admitted that the school could not accommodate them, indicating a pent-up demand that was not being met by the school board's own preferred curricular and social design for schools. It is ironic that now these parents' wishes are again being defied by the imposition of books with content disagreeable to the parents with children. I happen to believe that schools should respect the beliefs of the parents whose children are educated there, not that of social activists whose children attend other schools.

GBC 00:33, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Traditional school stats
The Surrey School Board is responsible for educating over 60,000 students. In the mid-1990's the BC education system suffered significant funding cutbacks. There was solid opposition to the establishment of a traditional school by the majority of parents, teachers and the Surrey Teacher's Association--the district could not afford the establishment of a traditional school without cutting funding for other necessary programmes. In spite of this, Stilwell pushed for the establishement of such a school to serve less than 1% of the parents in the district. In the words of Trustee Jim Chisholm, "there's a strong contingent of parents who would like to take over the entire school system", the traditional school was "rammed through" at a cost of $350,000. --BillC38 06:17, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

And the school that become a traditional school was going to be closed down, so it didn't take any school space from anyone. GBC 04:36, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

'LGBT' opposition
Perhaps we should also add categories to entries for people and parties that are pushing homosexual rights: 'Religious liberties opposition'.

There are those who oppose "LGBT" rights out of anger and hatred, like the Nazis. (They didn't like anyone if they weren't purely of the 'master race', and even those that were could not embrace "perversions" like communism, liberty, swing music, etc.)

Then there are those who oppose "LGBT" rights not because they think the individuals are unworthy of them, but because they recognize inherent implausibilities, incapabilities and unhealthiness. Homosexual, bisexual and other immoral sexual behaviours are unhealthy because they are often polygamous, and the "rights" sought by those promoting such "LGBT" are not even realistic. Same-sex "marriage" is a sham that is sought only for its symbolism, not because it will actually be fruitful for society.

"LGBT" "opponents" who, like Heather, Ed Vanwoudenberg, myself and other CHP candidates, do not hate homosexuals, bisexuals (and those who practice other immoral sexual behaviours) as people. If we truly obey God and seek to be like Jesus Christ, we do not hate homosexuals, and I certainly do not. I have met three or four homosexuals, and I feel no revulsion or hatred. Rather, my heart aches in agony for them. I yearn for them to know true happiness in Christ, not the counterfeit happiness they have. I oppose "LGBT" "rights" because it will do nothing but prolong their ultimate agony, an agony I desire them to not have to endure.

Therefore, please recognize that while there are "LGBT" opponents who do have revulsion and hatred for homosexuals, bisexuals and such, the people who do have such hatred are ignorant of the Great Commandment.

I recommend a review as to whether it is appropriate to hastily and unqualifiably apply, to people who subscribe to a faith that calls upon them to practice that Great Commandment, the label that is assumed to mean a feeling of personal hatred: "LGBT" opposition?!

GBC 06:37, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Further to above comments...

Heather Stilwell does not deserve the "LGBT opposition" category. She opposes it only because recognition of "LGBT" "rights" would prolong, for those individuals, their personal agonies like clinical depression, and would also prolong the division they maintain that keeps God from reconciling them to Himself. Heather and I would agree that we want them in Heaven when this life on earth is done, not lost forever in Hell.

If anyone merits the "LGBT opposition" category, it would be Fred Phelps, the Kansas "minister" who does heartless things like picket at the funeral of a homosexual boy and claim that he's in Hell or that God hates such people. God does not hate homosexuals - that's why Jesus died on the cross, to pay for their sins, not just mine, Billy Graham's, Mother Teresa's and others who are heterosexual. And Phelps does not know that Matthew Shepard (sp?) is in Hell. Neither do I. I hope Matthew's in Heaven, and it will be a joy for me to see him there.

But I will not support the LGBT opposition category being put on Fred Phelps, either. I will go there, and request its removal, and leave it up to a vote. As long as the category exists, it is open to misuse. Phelps and Heather Stilwell voice opinions. The difference is: Heather wants the redemption of homosexuals; Phelps has written them off and mouths vile hatred at them.

GBC 00:48, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, well, you see, claiming that "homosexuals" are in need of redemption in the first place is what earns that woman a place in that category -- well, to be precise, the fact that she actively works to deny people rights does. You know, you may have your opinon, and she may have hers - but to claim that this opinion is the only one that is "right" is something that you really should do only outside of Wikipedia. Because here, you know, we have NPOV, and that really does not go well with bible-thumping. Besides, what is your point? You rant here for pages that she indeed opposes LGBT rights - even the most basic one, human dignity - and then you whine if she is put into the appropriate category? That does not make a whole lot of sense, to put it mildly. -- AlexR 07:36, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I see no dignity in being clinically depressed. People who suffered clinical depression were cured of that depression when they were treated for their addiction to homosexual behaviour. I see no dignity in being physically injured in the violence that characteristically found when homosexuals exploit someone like Jessie Dirkhiser, a young boy who was assaulted, repeatedly raped and died from the abuse of two homosexual men. Homosexuals are, like all other people, in need of redemption; there is not a human being born who does not need it, but sadly, those who refuse to give up the justification of their sins miss out on redemption. Why is it regarded as "hatred" to want to share, with homosexuals, the glories of Heaven? I regard it as hatred by people like Fred Phelps who would willingly let homosexuals go to the eternal agony of separation from God. Hate sends to Hell, Love invites to Heaven. GBC 23:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The problem is that most LGBT people are not depressed, and would be even less if they would not suffer from the "attention" of the like of Ms. Stilwell. And I sincerely doubt that the undeniably horrible fate of Jessie Dirkhiser was somehow more horrible than that of children assaulted, raped and killed by heterosexual people - because, you know, that happens, too. As for the need of redemption, two things: a) not everybody believes in eternal sin and the idea that "every human needs redemption" in the first place, and b) should it indeed be needed at all, there is no reason to assume that LGBT people (which is, BTW, not quite the same as "homosexual people") need it any more than non-LGBT people. Also, your "invitation to heaven" comes at gunpoint; and I really don't see why anybody should feel particularly invited by people who denying them the right to be as God made them. That is not an invitation to heaven, that is a ticket to hell; and the difference between the likes of Ms. Stillwell and Fred Phelps is just a gradual one, but not a fundamental one. -- AlexR 00:20, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Even in countries with widespread acceptance of homosexuality, like the Netherlands, or cities like San Francisco, the rate of clinical depression among them is no lower. If there's such widespread acceptance, why are they still depressed... unless it is inherent in the unnatural and destructive nature of the behaviour?   As to Jessie Dirkhiser, only one major newspaper mentioned his case, while Matthew Shepard received massive coverage; a bias - the homosexuals who assaulted (to a fatal degree) Jessie for their own gratification aren't villains to the mass media, but the men who assaulted Matthew are?  I think the assaulters of both boys are criminals! Also, God doesn't hold a gun to anyone's head to accept Christ - God gave us free choice, and if we choose to be self-willed, doing what we want, then we can pay the price for our sins.  "The wages of sin is death", so therefore, all of us are sentenced to death for being unholy. The good news is that Christ dies for us so those who accept Christ don't have to die for their sins. If homosexuals don't want to give their lives to Christ, God is perfectly willing to let them die themselves to pay for their sins. Sure, that is a religious belief, but unlike every other faith, for which no savior is provided, Christianity does have a savior to rescue us from condemnation. I don't believe Islam provides a savior, although you can go to "paradise" (with 70 virgins just for you) if you kill a bunch of people and die in that act; Judaism, like Christianity, seeks a savior, but does not yet realize the savior has already come. Christianity is also the fastest growing faith in the world, even though it is commonly believed that Islam is growing faster. GBC 01:00, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I refuse to get involved in this discussion, but as a Dutchman, I'm very curious as to what you are basing your statement on that "even in countries with widespread acceptance of homosexuality, like the Netherlands... the rate of clinical depression among them is no lower." What are your references? Aecis 09:29, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

right|thumb|Jessie Dirkhiser is one thing, but what Fred Phelps wants to do is another [[User:Veryblueboy|horseboy 14:52, 16 August 2005 (UTC)]]

This discussion is way off topic--AJSingh 00:27, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Parents' rights
The following was just added to the article:

Stilwell says she is a strong supporter of parents' rights, that is to say, the 'rights' of a minority of parents with conservative views, who have no respect for the equality provisions found in section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Why do group rights and national rights usurp individual rights? I believe that all Stilwell is seeking is the respect of those parents' rights. And since the writer of that section refers to those conservative parents as a minority, then Stilwell is defending minority rights, something that Liberal-minded groups have been using the charter for since 1982. Bravo to Stilwell for defending a minority's rights.

Why should those conservative parents' be denied their rights? They are a minority, as the writer of the paragraph said, so shouldn't they have their minority rights protected by the Charter?

Besides, this is what section 15 says: Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

Equal protection and equal benefit of the law! If conservative-viewed parents want their children excluded from teachings that violate the conscienscious beliefs, or religious beliefs as the case may be, then they are entitled to that protection and benefit.

GBC 05:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

It's not the business of wikipedia to be interprutting section 15. I'm removing the last sentance. I think the bigotry is plenty clear in the rest of the article. Benw 01:30, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 17:29, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Heather Stilwell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050429190329/http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=70&item=59 to http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=70&item=59
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101209041344/http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Heather%20Stilwell%20former%20Surrey%20school%20board%20chair%20dies%20cancer/3935916/story.html to http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Heather+Stilwell+former+Surrey+school+board+chair+dies+cancer/3935916/story.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:21, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heather Stilwell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928011849/http://www.heatherstilwell.ca/ to http://www.heatherstilwell.ca/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:18, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heather Stilwell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927204638/http://www.surrey.ca/Inside+City+Hall/Election/Election+Results+Summary.htm to http://www.surrey.ca/Inside+City+Hall/Election/Election+Results+Summary.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:19, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Heather Stilwell


text:
New Melones Dam

New Melones Dam is an earth and rock filled embankment dam on the Stanislaus River, about 5 mi west of Jamestown, California, United States, on the border of Calaveras County and Tuolumne County. The water impounded by the 625 ft dam forms New Melones Lake, California's fourth-largest reservoir, in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada east of the San Joaquin Valley. The dam serves mainly for irrigation water supply, and also provides hydropower generation, flood control, and recreation benefits.

The dam was authorized in 1944 as a unit of the federal Central Valley Project, a system designed to provide irrigation water to the fertile agricultural region of the Central Valley. It would be built by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), and transferred to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) upon completion. In 1966, work began to clear the foundations for a high dam that would replace an earlier, much smaller structure built by two irrigation districts. Construction of the main embankment began in 1976, and was topped out in late 1978. The filling of New Melones Lake began in 1978, and the dam's hydroelectric station produced its first power in mid-1979.

New Melones was the focus of a long environmental battle during the 1970s and early 1980s; critics protested the flooding of a long scenic stretch of the Stanislaus River, which flowed over whitewater rapids through the deepest limestone canyon in the western United States. The protestors employed a variety of methods, some extreme, to prevent the filling of New Melones Lake until 1983, when record-setting floods filled the reservoir and nearly breached the dam's emergency spillway. The fight over New Melones galvanized the river conservation movement in California and influenced major water policy changes on the state and federal levels; since its completion, no other dams of its size or importance have been built in the United States.

The New Melones project has continued to generate controversy, due to the water yield from the project being lower than expected, and the use of New Melones water to meet federal environmental standards at the expense of farming. The reservoir is considered "over-allocated"; in an average year, it is unable to meet all the demands placed on it. The debate over water rights continues today, with environmentalists seeking to further increase fishery flows, and the Stanislaus irrigation districts asserting their senior rights to the river.

Specifications
New Melones Dam and its reservoir comprise the independent New Melones Unit of the Central Valley Project. The dam's primary purpose is to control the runoff from 904 mi2, or about 92 percent, of the watershed of the Stanislaus River, a major tributary of the San Joaquin River. At 625 ft high from the foundations and 1560 ft long, and containing 15700000 yd3 of material, New Melones is the second tallest earthfill dam in the United States, after Oroville Dam, and the sixth tallest dam overall. With a crest elevation of 1135 ft, the dam rises for 541 ft above the streambed. Flood waters are released through an unlined spillway about a mile (1.6 km) northwest of the dam, with a capacity of 112600 cuft/s. The dam also has an outlet works which can release up to 8300 cuft/s.

The impounded water behind the dam forms New Melones Lake, which at full pool of 1088 ft above sea level encompasses 12500 acre of surface water and a volume of 2400000 acre feet. About 450000 acre feet, 19 percent of the reservoir's capacity, is reserved for flood control. During flooding events, the dam is operated to keep flows on the Stanislaus River below 8000 cuft/s, although this figure may be lowered depending on flow conditions in the San Joaquin River. Between 1978 and 2010 the dam prevented a total of $505 million in flooding damages (adjusted for inflation), including $231 million during the New Year's flood of 1997 alone. However, the Manteca Bulletin noted that the dam was operated carelessly during the 1997 flood – almost 45000 acre of farmland was flooded near the confluence of the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers – and a further $80 million of damage could have been prevented had the reservoir been kept at a safe level.

The dam's hydroelectric power plant is located at its base on the north side of the river, and has a rated hydraulic head of 480 ft. The plant houses two 150.0 MW Francis turbines for a total capacity of 300 MW. Daily releases are made on a peaking basis; seasonal totals are dictated by irrigation (in summer) and flood control (in winter) requirements below the dam. The release from New Melones is re-regulated by the smaller downstream reservoir of Tulloch Dam, ensuring a stable flow in the Stanislaus River. For the period 2001 to 2015, the plant produced an average of 418 million kilowatt hours (KWh) annually. This ranged from a high of 910 million KWh in fiscal year 2006, to a low of 130 million KWh in 2015. The plant replaced the old 22 MW power station at the original Melones Dam; on average it generates about four times as much electricity as the original did.

By controlling the flows of the Stanislaus River, the dam and reservoir make available 200000 to 280000 acre feet of additional water each year. About 213000 acre of land along the Stanislaus River are irrigated using water from New Melones. According to the Bureau of Reclamation, the increase in water supply from New Melones Dam has "translated into prosperity for the region, allowing the growth of cities including Tracy and Manteca, and irrigating high-value crops including almonds, walnuts and grapes." In addition, New Melones Lake is one of the major tourist draws of the region, providing activities such as boating, fishing and shoreline camping. An estimated 800,000 people visit the lake each year; however, droughts can cause the closure of lake facilities due to low water levels.

Background
The modern development of the Stanislaus River began with the Oakdale and South San Joaquin Irrigation Districts, which were created in 1909 under the Wright Act to serve farmers in the area. Early irrigation along the Stanislaus River was dependent on the natural flow of the river, which was never enough to water crops during the late summer and fall. In 1926 the two irrigation districts jointly completed the original Melones Dam, a 211 ft high concrete arch dam with a storage capacity of 112500 acre feet. This reservoir was still not big enough for all the demands placed on it, especially during the long droughts of the 1930s.

The storage capacity of these early reservoirs was limited and the irrigation districts sought to increase the size of the Melones Reservoir. The federal Flood Control Act of 1944 authorized the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to build a 355 ft arch dam with a capacity of 450000 acre feet. As a primary flood control structure, it would protect 35000 acre of farmland as well as the towns of Oakdale, Riverbank and Ripon from flooding. It would generate electricity using the original 22 megawatt Melones hydroelectric plant. However, the cost-benefit analysis conducted for the project, then known as "New Melones I", did not justify the construction of the dam for flood control alone. If other benefits such as irrigation, fishery conservation and recreation were included, the cost-benefit ratio became positive. The Corps downplayed these additional benefits, intending to keep it primarily as a flood-control structure, because an irrigation project would then fall under the authority of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

During the 1950s the irrigation districts built two more dams, Donnells and Beardsley, along the upper Stanislaus River, forming (along with Tulloch Dam below Melones Dam) the Tri-Dam Project. The Corps objected to the Tri-Dam Project because the additional storage provided by these smaller dams further decreased the potential flood control benefit of New Melones. With the Corps unable to provide a sound economic justification, New Melones I was ultimately shelved in 1954. Meanwhile, the Oakdale and South San Joaquin irrigation districts had conducted their own study in the late 1940s and proposed a bigger dam, 460 ft tall with a capacity of 1.1 million acre feet (1.4 km3), or approximately one year's worth of Stanislaus River runoff.

The Bureau of Reclamation first surveyed the Melones dam site in the 1950s, and initially supported the proposed 1.1 million acre foot reservoir but soon increased the size of the project (to be known as "New Melones II") twofold, as part of the Central Valley Project. The Bureau cited numerous benefits to a larger reservoir, which it estimated would capture 335000 acre feet of extra water per year to increase irrigation, supply other units of the Central Valley Project, and maintain a minimum flow in the Stanislaus River to protect fish (before New Melones was built, diversions often dried the river completely in summer). This water would be provided above and beyond fulfilling previously existing water rights to the irrigation districts.

Although the 1944 version of the project had been abandoned, the Bureau and the Corps continued to argue over who would construct the dam. The Flood Control Act of 1962 authorized the final design of the dam – changing it from an arch to an embankment dam, increasing the size of the projected reservoir to 2400000 acre feet and requiring the construction of a new power plant. It also settled the interagency dispute by authorizing the Corps to construct the dam and direct flood control operations, and the Bureau to operate the dam for its other intended purposes such as irrigation and hydroelectricity.

In the early 1960s, there was some local opposition to the project on the grounds that it was too big – with a reservoir more than twice as large as the annual flow of the Stanislaus River, it might never fill and would be a waste of federal Central Valley Project funds. There was also concern that water from New Melones II might be exported outside the Stanislaus River basin and sold elsewhere; therefore, a rider attached to the 1962 act "reserved water for use within the basin with export of excess water only". Two years later, the Christmas flood of 1964 caused considerable damage along the Stanislaus River that a large dam could have prevented; Congressman John J. McFall "seized the political leverage that only [the floods] could provide, and urged the drenched farmers to support New Melones Dam." With opposition having largely turned to support, Congress approved funding in 1965, with construction starting the following year.

Initial construction and controversy
Actual construction began in July 1966 with clearing of the dam and reservoir site, construction of access roads, foundation preparations and excavations for the future outlet works. A diversion tunnel to allow the river to bypass the dam site was excavated between 1966 and December 1973. The Corps opened bids for construction of the main dam on October 10, 1972. Melones Contractors (a consortium formed by Guy F. Atckinson Company, Gordon H. Ball, and Arundel Corp.) won the primary construction contract for $109.7 million, while Allis-Chalmers and General Electric took an $11.5 million contract to provide turbines and hydroelectric generating equipment. During reservoir clearing operations, the USACE spent about $28 million relocating roads and bridges in the future reservoir space. Foundation work for the dam itself began on March 6, 1974 with the first embankment material placed in January 1976. Much of the embankment fill came from an excavation shortly northwest of the dam, which would later serve as the dam's spillway. During the height of construction in the summer, the total workforce reached about 800, while averaging between 500–600 in the winter months.

Although the 1964 floods had initially generated support for New Melones, a spirited opposition to the dam arose from both the river recreation industry and environmentalists who saw the Stanislaus River canyon as having greater value than a reservoir. River runners protested the threat to the Stanislaus River, which was becoming one of the most popular whitewater runs in the United States, with the first commercial rafting company established in 1962 (see images of the river, rafting, and the canyon at the Stanislaus River Archive). The river flowed through the deepest limestone canyon in the US, with cliffs rising 1000 ft above the water in places. Other natural features of the area included extensive limestone caves, and endemic species such as Banksula melones, the Melones cave harvestman. In addition, more than one hundred archaeological and historical sites, left over from Native American inhabitation and the Gold Rush period, were all situated in the reservoir flood zone.

While the US Army Corps of Engineers was constructing New Melones Dam, the dam operators, the US Bureau of Reclamation, applied to the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for water rights for the project. During extensive hearings, the Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club recommended that the SWRCB deny the Bureau’s applications for water rights because of the adverse effects of the project and the failure of the Bureau to show that the water sought to be stored will be put to beneficial use within a reasonable time. The Bureau took the position that the SWRCB was limited in its jurisdiction to determining if unappropriated water was available.

On April 4, 1973, the SWRCB issued Decision 1422 which held that the public interest requires the use of the Stanislaus River for whitewater boating, stream fishing and wildlife habitat be protected to the extent that water is not needed for other beneficial purposes. The SWRCB limited impoundment behind New Melones Dam to water needed for fish and wildlife releases, water quality releases, flood control and that needed to satisfy prior water rights at the existing Melones Reservoir. The Board reserved jurisdiction to consider allowing more storage behind New Melones Dam if the Bureau could show that the benefits from the storage outweigh the damage in the watershed above the dam and that the Bureau had firm commitments to deliver the water.

The federal government sued the SWRCB over the storage restrictions contained in Decision 1422. The federal government won at the district and appeals court level, but the US Supreme reversed the lower court decision. In 1978, the US Supreme Court held in California v. United States that under the 1902 Reclamation Act a State may impose any condition on control, appropriation, use or distribution of water in a federal reclamation project that is not inconsistent with clear congressional directives respecting the project. The Court remanded the case to the lower courts to consider the conditions imposed in Decision 1422.

While the administrative and legal battles were occurring, the environmental group Friends of the River (FOR) was formed in the early 1970s to push a statewide ballot measure, Proposition 17, which would have designated 9 mi of the Stanislaus River between Stanislaus Powerhouse and Parrott's Ferry as a National Wild and Scenic River and stopped the construction of New Melones Dam. Development-related interests such as PG&E, the California Chamber of Commerce and the contractors working on the dam spent millions of dollars lobbying against Prop 17 (see images on the Stanislaus River Archive). One of their slogans, "Stop the 'Wild River' Hoax!" argued that this part of the Stanislaus River was not untouched wilderness (as dams already existed both upstream and downstream of the 9-mile segment) and therefore was ineligible for Wild and Scenic designation. This statement was misleading, since the language of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act does not disqualify rivers with dams – only the portions already inundated by reservoirs. Dam supporters also argued that the Stanislaus River in its natural state was only accessible to a small group of people; that the rafting companies held a "monopoly" on river recreation and a reservoir would open up the area for far more tourists than would have visited otherwise, bringing more economic benefits to the area. Proposition 17 lost by a voter margin of 52.5%-47.5%.

Construction on the dam continued to progress. On April 1, 1978 the gates of the diversion tunnel were closed, and New Melones Lake began to fill, soon inundating the old Melones Dam. As the reservoir filled, work moved ahead on the power plant and generating units, which were all completed by the end of 1978. The main embankment of the dam was topped out on October 28, 1978.

Protests and filling of the lake
On May 22, 1979, Mark Dubois, one of the founders of FOR, hiked into the Stanislaus River Canyon and chained himself to a boulder, forcing the Corps to stop filling the lake or risk drowning him. Dubois hid in the canyon for five days while local authorities tried unsuccessfully to find him; he had written letters to the Corps and Governor Jerry Brown telling them of his plans in advance (see documents and images of this event on the Stanislaus River Archive). Ultimately, dam operators opened the gates, halting the rising reservoir at an elevation of 808 ft, or about 280 ft below its maximum design level. The Corps was delayed in handing the project over to the Bureau of Reclamation, as testing could not be completed on the hydroelectric turbines until the water level increased further. On May 29, Governor Brown vetoed Assembly Bill 2164, which would have allowed filling New Melones Lake to its full capacity.

In the meantime, environmental groups lobbied for a compromise to stay the lake level at the old Parrott's Ferry Bridge, 844 ft above sea level, corresponding to a storage capacity of 438000 acre feet: "We can have a working dam and a wild river." The irrigation districts, Reclamation officials, and local representatives including John Garamendi and Norman S. Waters, argued that to complete the dam only to not fill it was absurd. The state of California initially sided with the opposition. On November 20, 1980 the State Water Resources Control Board set the temporary upper limit for lake level at the old Parrott's Ferry Bridge. With that limit in place, operations of the dam and reservoir were handed to Reclamation.

Over the next two years the state continued to delay allowing the reservoir to fill because the Bureau of Reclamation had not convincingly demonstrated that "the irrigation need will outweigh any damage that results to fish, wildlife and recreation in the watershed above New Melones Dam." Further studies by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and the Bureau of Reclamation itself showed that completely filling New Melones Lake would, in fact, offset some of the benefits of the project. For example, if additional water were provided for farms, even more water would have to be released into the Stanislaus River to wash out polluted return flows from new irrigation. A larger reservoir would also halt the Stanislaus' spring flooding to such an extent that it would harm the salmon populations that the dam was intended to benefit. Also, a higher reservoir would allow for less flood control space in emergencies. The state determined that the optimal reservoir volume was 623000 acre feet, which would provide enough water to fulfill existing rights and fishery flows as well as provide a hedge against droughts and floods; although it would inundate about 2 mi of the river above Parrott's Ferry, FOR agreed to this compromise.

Ultimately, it was nature, not political maneuvering, that led to the filling of New Melones Lake. The winter and spring rainy season of 1982 was one of the wettest recorded in the 20th century. The Stanislaus River swelled to such high levels that it exceeded what could be safely released through the dam's outlets, and the reservoir rapidly surpassed the temporary limit. The winter of 1983 was even wetter and pushed water so high that it reached the lip of the emergency spillway (but did not flow over it), a level that has not been surpassed since. With the lake full, the state of California lifted the temporary limit in March, 1983. A deciding factor in the rescinding of the water-level limit was the prevention of $50 million in damages by New Melones Dam in 1982 and 1983, which demonstrated the dam's value for flood control.

Water rights disputes
New Melones Dam has a very large storage capacity relative to the watershed that feeds it, as compared to other major reservoirs in California. The potential water yield, and thus the supply contracts, of the Melones Project were calculated based on stream flow data between 1922 and 1978; however, this period may have been somewhat wetter than the long-term average. The Bureau of Reclamation estimated the additional water yield per year as 335000 acre feet but the actual yield has been closer to 200000 acre feet. As a result, the reservoir is often at a low water level because in most years demand is greater than supply. In the 38 years between 1978 and 2016, New Melones has only reached capacity five times, and only once (in 1983) has it reached the level of the spillway. Between 1987 and 1992 Reclamation was forced to purchase water from other agencies to fulfill New Melones' water obligations. Even so, the reservoir fell to a record low level of 83631 acre feet, 3.5% of capacity, on October 1, 1992. Conversely, the great storage capacity also means that New Melones can capture more flood runoff while other major California reservoirs must release it to maintain flood control space.

The original contracted water supply from New Melones Dam was 1067000 acre feet, of which 600000 acre feet was allocated to the Oakdale and South San Joaquin Irrigation Districts (who owned the original Melones Dam and have the oldest water rights); 422000 acre feet for Stanislaus River water quality and fishery conservation; and 45000 acre feet for the Stockton East Water District. Originally, Reclamation had planned to extend the water supply to other users, but even from the start, the Melones Project was barely able to meet these existing targets. New Melones releases are important for regional groundwater recharge, a vital water source for farmers when surface water supplies are cut off due to drought, and to protect water quality in the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers by diluting pollutants during the late summer and fall dry season.

Fishery flows
After the Central Valley Project Improvement Act in 1991 and the Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan in 1995, much more water was required to meet target environmental flows in the Stanislaus and San Joaquin Rivers and the Delta, which conflicts with the original language of the 1962 act authorizing the dam, which stated that only "excess water" could be appropriated for these uses. One of the new requirements was for spring and autumn "pulse flows" intended to help migration of anadromous fish (Chinook salmon and steelhead trout in particular). This policy has been criticized by local irrigation districts as a waste of water during dry years, as fish populations have continued to struggle despite the additional flows. Reclamation officials argue that the flows are needed to meet state and federal requirements, as well as the earlier Endangered Species Act of 1972. As a result, the Melones Project is now only able to meet all its contracts in above average water years. Local water users have coined the somewhat derisive nickname of "green dam" because the policy has shifted to favor fish rather than farmers.

A further constraint is that water released in autumn must be cold enough for anadromous fish to survive, and thus must be made from the lower level outlets at New Melones Dam. However, the old Melones Dam was not demolished during the construction of the new dam (the original dam remains submerged far below the reservoir surface, only rarely re-emerging when the water level is low). The old dam partially blocks the movement of cold water from the deepest parts of the reservoir, causing warmer surface water to be drawn out instead. As a result, in certain years the amount of irrigation water has been reduced in order to maintain enough depth in New Melones Lake in the fall to preserve the cold water pool.

A 2016 study by independent environmental consulting group FishBio showed that the artificial spring pulse flows from New Melones Dam do fairly little to support salmon and steelhead out-migration in the Stanislaus River. Rather, the fish take their cues from increased water flow due to rainfall, as they naturally would have before the many dams on the Stanislaus River were built. In the spring of 2016 about 12,500 juvenile salmon migrated downriver to the sea during April and May, but less than 1 percent migrated during the pulse flow. In years of drought when the lake level is low, releasing water during the spring creates consequences later in the year – because there is not enough cold water left for the autumn spawning run.

The state of California has further proposed that between 20 and 60 percent of the unimpaired, or natural flow of the Stanislaus River be allowed to run downstream during the spring to support ailing fish populations. In addition, the minimum level of New Melones Lake would be set at 700000 acre feet (29 percent capacity) at all times in order to preserve the cold water pool. This would essentially limit the usable storage in the reservoir to the 1250000 acre feet between the cold water pool and the flood-control pool, further handicapping the ability of the reservoir to manage water. This plan has been met with outcry from local cities and irrigation districts, which contend that it would heavily damage the farming economy and cause thousands of seasonal jobs to disappear. Furthermore, it does not address other major problems including introduced striped bass in the San Joaquin River, which eat many if not most of the juvenile salmon and steelhead before they even reach the sea.

Conflict and compromise
In 2015, Congressman Tom McClintock introduced HR 1668, the "Save Our Water Act", which "amends the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) to suspend during droughts the application of the ESA to water releases from water storage facilities by federal and state agencies in a navigable river basin." McClintock specifically cited the release of 30000 acre feet from New Melones Lake over several weeks in spring 2015, when New Melones Lake was approaching its lowest level on record since the 1992 drought. That year, very few fish had returned to the Stanislaus to spawn; in an editorial for MyMotherLode, Mark Truppner wrote: "Biologists estimate that it will affect the offspring of about 29 steelhead trout in the Stanislaus River – a few hundred smolts [sic] almost all of which will be eaten by predators long before they reach the ocean. And that assumes they won't swim toward the ocean on their own – as they have been doing without our helpful assistance since time immemorial." However the bill did not pass.

One potential solution has been outlined in a 2016 agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation, the local water districts and a number of other state and federal agencies. The local water districts would provide 75000 acre feet of water for fishery flows during the spring; this water would be sold to the San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority. Instead of draining into the ocean, it would be captured by the large Central Valley Project and State Water Project pumping stations in the Delta for eventual re-use on Authority lands. Previously, Reclamation had been taking the Stanislaus irrigation districts' water without paying for it. Essentially, the agreement allows for the water to be re-used for agriculture while still maintaining fishery flows in the Stanislaus River.

Legacy
The controversy over New Melones Dam was one of the most heated environmental disputes in the U.S. at the time. The dam was constructed at a time of growing public support for environmental preservation, as compared to development or utilitarian conservation of natural resources. Friends of the River describes the campaign against the dam as "probably the biggest citizen effort to save a river and stop a dam in American history." The Bureau of Reclamation itself has called New Melones "a case study of all that can go wrong with a project." Although opponents of the dam were ultimately unsuccessful, the campaign greatly strengthened the political power of the river conservation movement in California and the rest of the United States; in California, a number of later dam projects were defeated by citizen opposition, including a hydroelectric project on the nearby Tuolumne River which was canceled less than two years after New Melones Dam was completed.

In Dam Politics: Restoring America's Rivers, William R. Lowry writes:

"The New Melones Dam was one of the last of its kind. Although proclamations that dam building no longer occurs in the United States are not completely true, it is true that no structure as large or as significant has since been built on an American river. And since this date, virtually no structural modification to a river in this country has gone unopposed."

The New Melones debate influenced the eventual protection of a number of other northern California rivers (the Eel, Klamath and others) under the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System starting in 1980. It considerably changed the California state government's approach to water resources development, switching focus from massive dam projects to conservation and policy improvements. In 1982, the same year that New Melones Lake filled, the Reclamation Reform Act set more stringent standards for vetting federal Reclamation projects, essentially "distancing federal policy from the 'dams-everywhere' approach of the past." However, the relative lack of new storage has severely strained California's water system, which now serves 15 million more people than it did when New Melones Dam was completed in 1979. In a history of the dam written in 1994 as part of the Bureau of Reclamation History Program, Joe Simonds came to this conclusion:"The New Melones Dam stands as a reminder of the conflicts surrounding growth, the environment, and water in the West. The Corps built it at the end of the era of large dam construction. Even without the environmental controversy that surrounds the project, the operational and water yield problems will certainly cause continued difficulties well into the future. With the enormity of the problems facing New Melones, it seems unlikely that the project will ever realize its full potential as a multi use unit. Indeed, new Melones may become a case study of all that can go wrong with a project."

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

title: New Melones Dam


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck andrews

 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. Golbez 06:58, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Chuck andrews
No evidence of notability. Delete. -gadfium 05:59, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 06:32, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * keep notable Chubby Chicken 15:38, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Above recently created account, Chubby Chicken, is voting "keep, notable" for numerous clearly non-notable (indeed bordering on speedy) articles. Please keep that grain of information in mind when counting votes. -- BD2412 talk 20:14, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)
 * delete not notable. Is Chubby Chicken perchance called Anthony? Dunc|☺ 16:07, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * All of Chubby Chicken's votes today in many different discussions are identical. They began at Votes for deletion/Again, where Chubby Chicken has also removed the VFD notice. Uncle G 16:27, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)
 * Geogre's Law applies again. WP:BIO criteria not met. Delete. Uncle G 16:27, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)
 * Delete even achieving "advanced highers in ... Big Headedness" does not make one notable. - DS1953 19:39, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * delete not notable (outside Renfrewshire) --TimPope 22:59, 11 Jun 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:
Talk:Jena Malone

Place of birth
If Jena was born in Lake Tahoe (as it is mentioned in the article), she she will be drowned in a few seconds, because Lake Tahoe is a sea. So, maybe she's born in South Lake Tahoe, Tahoe City or another town aside the sea. If this isn't true she could have been born in Sparks, Nevada - that's what many websites say. Maybe she currently lives in South Lake Tahoe or Tahoe City or in some place at Lake Tahoe. So what's really true about this fact? --84.138.70.214 between 07:07 and 08:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that this is somewhat misleading because Lake Tahoe indeed appears to be a lake not a city or town, though at the bottom of the same article it says that Lake Tahoe is one of the major regions of Nevada (see Template:Nevada). However, though most of the external sources simply repeat that she was born in Lake Tahoe, Nevada, this article in the Notable Names Database states that she was born in Sparks, Nevada. The same article suggests that during her childhood she had lived in 27 different places "including their car, and a trailer park on the outskirts of Lake Tahoe". I think it would be more appropriate either to mention the region of Lake Tahoe or Sparks as her birthplace. Nevertheless, I have no idea where she lives now. :) --Jūzeris | Talk 16:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, Lake Tahoe is a region, like the Vegas Valley (?) or the North Hills of greater Pittsburgh, where I live. There is no single municipality called Lake Tahoe. S. Lake Tahoe is on the CA side. I think it's perfectly fine to say Lake Tahoe, NV, just like saying "near NYC". It's a bit unsatisfying, as I've personally been to Incline Vlg., NV, and know the geography there, but what do you do? As far as Sparks, that borders Reno, IIRC, so Sparks is not a LT town.

I suppose we'll never know the truth. Doesn't she have an oficial website? That ought to clear it up.--Coryma 13:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Her website is:www.jenamalone.com        71.96.236.134 04:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

Just to close the discussion, Jena Malone was born in Sparks, Nevada, and grew up in a number of locations in the Lake Tahoe region. Since 2003, she owns a house in the California side of the Lake Tahoe region (For obvious reasons, I won't disclose the precise location). Anyway, for the purpose of finding work as an adult actress, Jena has recently moved - at least temporarily - to LA. :-) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.92.79 (talk) 17:49, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Punk'd appearance as "irrelevant content"
Why do you feel that this is "irrelevant content", Mr. Backburner001? Before you remove something like a TV appearance, you may want to get some consensus to see if everyone else feels that its irrelevant as well.--Azathar 04:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I feel that the Punk'd reference is irrelevant because I do not consider appearances on such shows to be substantive information about a the career of an actor/actress. Mentioning that Jena Malone appeared on a TV show where celebrities have pranks pulled on them tells me nothing about Malone's career or significance as an actress.  It instead functions as nothing more than a subtle advertisement for Punk'd, which I believe is bad for the encyclopedia. -- backburner001

 * I don't believe consensus was needed in this case. Do you think it is necessary to reach a consensus everytime you remove vandalism from a page?  Each article has a talk page and I made my edit clear on the history page.  If people have a problem with it, as you did, they can post their comments here and I will respond to them. Doesn't that sound reasonable?  -- backburner001 20:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * This is not a big or potentially controversial issue so one should not fear being bold about editing it. If someone disagrees they can raise the issue on the talk page as happened here. I do agree that the Punk'd appearence is not really significant for this article. --Bjarki 00:09, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, it depends on your defination of vandalism, I don't think the Punk'd reference is vandalism, and I do think it is relevant. You did make your edit fairly, I'll give you that, and you did explain yourself, though I don't agree with your argument, and I don't have too, which is the beauty of Wikipedia. But, we do need to come up with some way to decide if the reference shoudl stay or go, as neither of us are the final determination of it. Any ideas?--Azathar 03:44, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * My apologies for not getting to this earlier. Before I discuss the reference, I’d like to thank you for the way you chose to address this issue.  I’ve run into the same disagreement with another editor about the same reference that has evolved into a rather unpleasant dispute.  I agree – neither you nor I can make a final determination on the issue as the nature of Wikipedia demands that we reach some sort of agreement or compromise on these matters.  I appreciate your willingness to discuss this issue with me in a calm and civil manner.

 * I don’t think that the reference is necessarily vandalism; just that it is not relevant content unless it is placed within a context that makes it relevant. In discussing this issue on the Lindsay Lohan talk page, I’ve suggested that Punk’d is not any different from a news appearance (and I doubt many Wikipedians would consider such news appearances as particularly notable).  I’m not sure how to go about solving this issue.  There are three options I can come up with:

 * Keep the reference (which I would rather not do)
 * Delete the reference (which you would rather not do)
 * Rewrite the reference with attention to making its relevance explicit

 * It seems like the third option is the option with the most potential. What do you think? -- backburner001 00:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Sorry about my tardiness on this, as I have been in the process of moving and have no internet (I'm currently at work, off the clock, writing this). Anyway, Something I have thought about is what about trivia sections. Mackenzie Rosman has one, and it includes some things which woudln't fit into the rest of the entry, but in which others would consider important. Perhaps this is a solution where we could add a section to each entry that this is in dispute with regarding the Punk'd reference?--Azathar 04:19, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

 * No worries about the tardiness. I made this suggestion in regard to the Lindsay Lohan Punk'd dispute.  Some editors feel that trivia sections trivialize articles and are generally not looked upon with favor when going through the FAC process.  I tend to agree that trivia sections are not encyclopedic, but it is a potential compromise and I don't feel extremely strongly against the inclusion of trivia sections for content that cannot be expanded upon.

 * Are there any guidelines on Wikipedia that address the relevance of references in articles that would be helpful in situations like this? -- backburner001 04:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Footnotes and references
I've had this article tagged as unreferenced since May 22. My attempts at keeping this article tagged as such have been unsuccessful thus far due to multiple reversions by an editor who is unwilling to discuss her reversions any further. However, instead of engaging in an edit war, I've decided to add some inline citations to my previously tagged version of this article. I am hoping this will jump start the process of finding appropriate references and adding them here. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. -- backburner001 17:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you. It's always good to have articles referenced, but not to the extent of defacing them for an indefinite period when they aren't disputed. Rebecca 05:35, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree that tagging unreferenced statements qualifies as defacing articles. However, it appears in the current revision that you are willing to let specific statements remain tagged, which I think is a step in the right direction.  -- backburner001 14:34, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * On the grounds that you actually intend to cite them in the foreseeable future. Rebecca 04:33, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
 * On the grounds that any Wikipedia editor intends to cite them. The responsibility to cite these statements does not only lie with me.  It lies with you and other editors too.  The templates I used to tag statements with in this article exist to alert other editors to citation problems.  Removing these tags only impedes our ability to improve articles that do not conform to WP:CITE. -- backburner001 14:12, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I hate to tell you this but the IMDB is not a reliable source - in fact, it is usually quite the opposite. Mad Jack 15:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Can you suggest any alternate sources? Furthermore, can you elaborate on why IMDB is not reliable? (Note: I'm do not necessarily disagree with you on IMDB's reliability; I'd just like to discuss it in further detail.) -- backburner001 18:14, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I simply can not even begin citing examples of incorrect IMDB information. The IMDB is not reliable simply because it is, essentially, Wikipedia. It's just harder to delete wrong info from there then it is here. The IMDB trivia or bios are submitted by fans or by who-knows-what. If we're lucky, it's correct. If we're not, it isn't and came from the imagination of the submitter. Same thing for film credits for upcoming movies (see a recent example in Halloween (2007 film) (the "Rumored storylines and castings" section - two paragraphs in). Every single one of these trivia sites - IMDB, NNDB, TVtom are second-hand, info-gathering sources, just like Wikipedia. And unless they cite where they got their info from - which they don't - they simply aren't reliable. Good sources for actors, at least, are interviews/in-depth profiles - anywhere where the subject was personally involved in. I'm going to put this page on my "to do" list and cite it to reliable sources tomorrow or so. Mad Jack 07:54, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
 * There, I couldn't help myself and sourced it now - hope that helps. I couldn't find a source for this, though: "In 2002, Malone began studying photography at a community college in northern California." According to this,, she was planning to do so... whether she ever did I am not sure. But yeah, those are the kinda sources that make Wikipedia look almost like a first-hand source, and definitely more reliable than the IMDB. :) Mad Jack 08:26, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Donnie Darko
I honestly cannot understand why my reference to Donnie Darko was deleted. The person who deleted it made a smarmy comment about her prior nomination for a Golden Globe for a TV movie. There is a fairly large difference between getting a Golden Globe nomination for work done as a supporting actress for a TV movie and starring as the romantic lead in a (relatively) big budget Hollywood movie (albeit one that did not make much money). Indeed, the page _inaccurately_ says that her first starring role was in the 2004 film Saved! But her first starring role was in Donnie Darko. Three years earlier. And no, playing "Young Ellie" in Contact would not qualify as a breakout role. Nor was playing a minor role in a Showtime movie of the same nature. Donnie Darko was a) a romantic lead where she was the second most important character b) a Hollywood release that played in cinemas and IMHO c) the highest visibility role that Jena Malone has played in her career. With all due respect to Saved!, Donnie Darko is in fairly common rotation on the various cable movie channels, and I've never seen Saved! shown once.  (Nor Bastard Out of Carolina for that matter).  The only two Jena Malone films that get regular play are Donnie Darko and The Ruins.  I'm resubmitting with language emphasizing the high visibility of the role.

I honestly cannot understand how the Donnie Darko reference was deleted while the relatively unimportant role of Lydia Bennett in Pride and Prejudice was left in. Clearly the person who made the edit has not seen Donnie Darko. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RickDesper (talk • contribs) 04:43, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Pronunciation
I'd love to know how to pronounce the name of this actress. The pronunciation of the first name can still be guessed, more or less, but that of the last name remains opaque. If anybody should know how to pronounce Jena Malone, he resp. she may just contact me. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 16:56, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * "Malone" is "opaque"?? I've lived throughout the USA and Canada, and have never heard it any way other than "mɐ'lon". How else could it be pronounced, unless you vocalize the silent "e", which would be very odd in English. Cresix (talk) 18:11, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Thank You for the information. I have, myself, unfortunately, not (yet) lived throughout the USA and Canada for more than two months, and that at the time when Mrs. Malone was just ten years old. For me, as, for sure, also for many other foreigners, such an apparently simple thing can, therefore, indeed quite appear opaque. (Watching Sucker Punch in the cinema, one does not get the opportunity to hear the actresses` real names!)

 * My record of adding pronunciation information to Wikipedia articles is not absolutely flawless, but I think I can, for the beginning, add a hint to the article in the tokens explained at IPA for English, which deviate from those You have used, above. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 09:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * My knowledge of IPA may leave something to be desired. But the first syllable is "muh" as in "must") and the last syllable has a long "o" (as in "phone") and a silent "e"; emphasis on the last syllable. Cresix (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

So, the vowel(s) of the second syllable is / are to be pronounced just like those in "phone"? (I remove the pronunciation information till this is cleared.) --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes; the last four letters of Malone are pronunced just like the word they make: "lone". Cresix (talk) 17:00, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

 * O.k., so the problem should be solved. I`m just going to insert a respective hint. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 18:44, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

 * You could, maybe, also contribute to the addition of such information to Seth Rogen, where the first name also does not have to be explained, but the last name could be (see old discussion: Talk:Seth_Rogen). --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 04:06, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm not sure about that one. Cresix (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

 * What about Amanda Seyfried (last name)? --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 19:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Oh, that`s already there. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

One more question: How does one have to pronounce Jamie Chung (last name)? I strongly guess, but am not sure. Is that name, maybe, so common in America or elsewhere that it could appear ridiculous to point to the pronunciation? --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 22:29, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I just noticed this comment. Among native English speakers in the USA, I've always heard "Chung" pronounced with the "Ch" as in "change" and the "ung" as in "hung". If I remember correctly, that's how Connie Chung says it. But I don't know how Jamie Chung pronounces it, or how most Chinese people would say it. Cresix (talk) 23:15, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

 * O.k., that`s what I have suggested above in the IPA notation. If the name is so common, but on the other side there could still be an exception with Jamie Chung, we rather don`t add any pronunciation information to the article, at the moment. Jamie Chung, moreover, has not Chinese, but Korean ancestors according to this MTV biography page on her. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 07:56, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

 * An American here, and I've always heard "Malone" pronounced the same way (like Sam Malone on Cheers for example) so that didn't trip me up too much.

 * However, I've never seen the name "Jena" before... is is pronounced like "Jenna" or like "Gina" ?? -- 68.9.50.187 (talk) 03:18, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

The transcription of her last name as /mʌˈloʊn/ cannot be right because an "a" in spelling is NEVER vowel #10, /ʌ/, in its phonetic transcription. The options are: schwa /ɐ/, because the syllable isn't stressed; or /æ/, because the syllable only has one vowel in spelling, so it isn't likely for the phonetic transcription to be a long vowel (like /ɑː/ in "car") or a diphthong.190.18.40.183 (talk) 19:43, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Link to General Educational Development
As Cresix has reverted the edit I unlinked GED with and wrote it out, I`d like to ask if the abbreviation could not also be unlinked, before I simply do that. I, personally, do not yet know the United States as well as to be able to decide how well this abbreviation is known throughout the country, and so on. Indeed, when I visited the country, in 1995, involuntarily, it was striking to me how much there was talked about such an examination. My Canadian relatives even showed me a strong paperback volume with mathematical formula which they told me about was the US equivalent to what I had just passed, in Germany, myself. I did not understand anything of those formula, but it was striking how often my cousin, and also others, began talking about that subject, again and again. It nearly looked as if they expected me to do that examination, myself. After all, also this my experience endorses my impression that the thing was quite well known in the US, and that is also what You are talking about, here, Yourself. So, why should we not unlink even the abbreviation - although it is only an abbreviation? Typing in "ged" into the English Wikipedia`s search field, one fairly swiftly finds out about what is meant. And it is always better if in an article there are only linked to the things which specifically refer to the article`s catchword, isn`t it? That brings about a much more calm overall atmosphere.

Jena Malone seems to be a special case regarding such matters, because she has already very early begun working as an actress and then, even, won legal emancipation from her mother, earlier than usual - anyway, an interesting case. Also the fact that Malone has moved unusually often in her childhood and that, often, over considerable distances draws the attention to such questions of how one might organize one`s education resp. that of one`s children, in the US. All this could indeed - falsely - be counted a reason to link to the General Educational Development. But, from a really systematic point of view, even this could not suffice.

Such a certificate, moreover, remains something dry and unromantic and, thus, forms a contradiction to the subject of this article and its nature. For me, the result is altogether that the General Educational Development, be it abbreviated or not, should rather not be linked, here. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 22:44, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Hans. The only reason I reverted your good faith edit and restored "GED" is because that abbreviation is very widely used in the United States. It's quite common to hear, "He didn't finish high school but got his GED." I'm not sure how many people understand exactly what it stands for, just the general idea of what it means. Now, you raise another completely different issue that I didn't understand from your edit summary, if I understand you correctly now: Should "GED" be linked to General Educational Development. I don't feel strongly one way or the other, but I would like to hear other opinions. If others agree with you, that's fine with me. But we must include the acronym GED (linked or unlinked) if we mention her education, because she did not graduate from high school in the usual way, and I'm sure a lot of readers don't realize that "General Educational Development" refers to "GED". Thanks for explaining more fully. Cresix (talk) 23:08, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

 * GED could, for example, reasonably be linked to, here, if it had been changed or been let as it was due to the Jena Malone case, by the legislative forces, and so on, or if Mrs. Malone had really experienced some troubles around it which directly refer to it. The GED is of bigger interest, here, than it might be in many other articles about people who have passed it, but the basic requirements for it to be linked are not yet given, here. --Hans Dunkelberg (talk) 15:13, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with unlinking it, as long as we include "GED" in her educational information. Thanks. Cresix (talk) 16:01, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Who's her daddy?
Obviously her birth was not the result of conception between two lesbian lovers. So does anyone know who her father is and what the deal is about him? Won legal emancipation from her mother, who is now barred from interfering with Jena's career and earnings in January 2000. Filed suit against mother Debbie, charging mismanagement of her earnings, failure to pay taxes. But where is mention of her father? One article says that she was the product of a one night stand and only saw her father once at age 4. Albert14nx05y (talk) 09:44, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Which article is that? Is it a reliable source? For An Angel (talk) 16:07, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Try this http://www.biography.com/people/jena-malone-17176434 Albert14nx05y (talk) 03:18, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, that site appears to be a reliable secondary source with a reputation for fact checking and editorial oversight. I can accept facts cited to this page. Now find more pages and sites like this and you will have well-sourced articles. Elizium23 (talk) 10:19, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Catching Fire
Please do not add Catching Fire to the filmography yet, because it is not yet in production. The current status is that Malone is said to be in talks with the producers for the role of Johanna Mason. Nothing is definite yet - so please observe WP:CRYSTAL. When the announcement comes that she has signed on to the picture, the story can be included in the prose section about her career. Catching Fire can be added to the filmography only when principal photography has commenced. It will assuredly be before the end of 2012. Thank you for your contributions. Elizium23 (talk) 12:32, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jena Malone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060909051904/http://www.ym.com/jsp/stars/ontheverge/index.jsp to http://www.ym.com/jsp/stars/ontheverge/index.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070219024744/http://pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/41227/Actress_Jena_Malone_Records_Social_Registry_7 to http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/41227/Actress_Jena_Malone_Records_Social_Registry_7

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Cheaters
the link for her role in the film Cheaters is incorrect, it points to a TV show. The correct link should be https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheaters_(film) as found in Jeff Daniels' page, he is also in the movie. 12.15.136.26 (talk) 02:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jena Malone


text:
Jean Blaquière

Jean Blaquière, a Pentecostal pastor, was a candidate for the Christian Heritage Party of Canada in the Canadian federal election of 1993, and won the party leadership in March 1994 at a Vancouver convention, in a race with two other contenders.

Blaquière chose to step down at the next convention in November 1995 in London, Ontario, and was succeeded by Ron Gray.

title: Jean Blaquière


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/War?

 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 redirect. JYolkowski // talk 15:18, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

War?
The current content is not encyclopedic at all, and even if it were to be cleaned up, this particular song does not really warrant its own article. Should be redirected to System of a Down (album) MrHate 06:02, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I say redirect to the album, but you don't really have to list it on VfD if all you want is a redirect; you can do that yourself. :-) Shiri — Talk 06:15, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Your wisdom overshadows my ignorance. Perhaps that would've been a good idea :) However, perhaps a delete might be suitable also. MrHate 07:27, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * Is this the same song as "War (song)"? If so, then I say redirect and merge since that article discusses different versions of the song. If this is a different song, delete but keep a redirect to War (song). 23skidoo 06:21, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: They are different and unrelated songs. MrHate 07:27, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes War (song) was written by Barrett Strong who had the #1 US hit with it in 1970. Malakian and Tankian of System of a Down wrote War? which is a track from their first album. Our War disambiguation record claims it was a single but there is no record of it charting. My suggestion is that it should be a redirect to War (disambiguation) 203.26.16.66 08:01, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oops that was me. Capitalistroadster 08:05, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Capitalistroadster. Kappa 08:42, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Hang on. I'll make a Flash animation of a Jack Russell Terrier saying "War?" and cocking its head so we have notable content for this article, because as we know, every Flash animation ever made is notable and encyclopedic Redirect. — Phil Welch 00:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * War? What is it good for? Absolutely nothing! Redirect. Lord Bob 08:30, Jun 12, 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 .

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/War?


text:
Talk:Da Ali G Show

Untitled
what is this article about? there were more than 6 episodes of Ali G, and it wasnt aired in the US first, because the entire reason the film worked was no one in america knew who Borat was.
 * There were indeed more than 6 episodes overall, and that fact is noted in the article (the infobox states 6 for the UK version and 12 for the US) - The show was aired in on HBO in the US (whether it was aired on there before the UK, I don't know off hand) and Borat was definitely known here, but not widely known as HBO isn't widely distributed. Etron81 (talk) 21:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

S3
Anyone know if there will be a Season Three, and if so when? If so, add it! --Mister Tattle 06:04, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

UK title of US version
In Britain this series is called Ali G in Da USA or Ali G in Da USAiii. That information should be put into the body of the article in the first line, bolded, not just as a redirect. Can someone who actually knows what it's called there add it? Thanks. Moncrief 03:10, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Studio shots, US vs. UK
I realized I didn't add a summary for deletion of the UK vs US "difference" that incorrectly stated that the US did only on-location shots. The HBO epsodes "Politics" episode featured a DEA agent being interviewed on-set and a number of episodes (see link) provided "roundtable" discussions with Ali G, all on-set. Ogre lawless 16:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Accent
Regarding statment in differences between seasons/series (The 3 characters have the same British accent.) As far as i can remember the 3 characters have never had the same accent in the the the first season. I maybe wrong but until this can be proved either way i have removed the statment.

Only one character has a british accent and that is Ali G, the others have a German, and Kazakstani accent.
 * That's not a 'typical' british accent - 'yoof' or 'street' owes a lot to Jamaica.
 * Bruno is Austrian - slightly different from German, but I doubt Bruno's accent is any more accurate than his mannerisms.
 * I doubt Borat has a Kazakh accent - many of his words are Hebrew !
 * --195.137.93.171 (talk) 03:50, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Korki Bucek
I think this section should be removed as the character has never made an appearance on the series; he is only mentioned in conversation. It also detracts from the other three characters as they are the main characters of the show. WikiFew 21:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Respek
Why does "respek" redirect here? 67.188.172.165 16:41, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Respek is a word Ali G commonly uses. As in "respect," a term used in Eubonics - Pieterkonink 20:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

DVD
Many television articles mentions DVD releases. We should do so here. EmpComm 23:09, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Just added DVD release tables! :) (Etron81 14:50, 11 September 2007 (UTC))

 * I've moved the DVD release tables to their own page as it was getting long... (Etron81 17:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC))

Andy Rooney
I think this is argumentative and should not be contained in articles for Ali G or Andy Rooney.--Eyespy100 17:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Techno music?
what type of music or artist is that techno music during Ali G segments?--Sonjaaa 12:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Bruno.jpg
Image:Bruno.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 Wikipedia articles 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 other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 16:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Corky Bucek
The article on Corky Bucek "was nominated for deletion on 9 June 2006. The result of the discussion was merge with Da Ali G Show." HOWEVER - there is nothing on Corky Bucek on Da Ali G Show article, nor on the Borat or Borat film articles. The result was MERGE, not DELETE. Would someone please fix this? Corky Bucek is mentioned in Ali G, in Borat the film, and on TV appearances by Borat. It is of sufficient significance to appear in at least one of the Borat articles here. (Traveling overseas today or I'd do this myself.) --GeĸrίtzĿ...•˚˚ 11:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Laugh track
If I'm not mistaken, I believe the HBO series does NOT have a laugh track but the Channel 4 series does. Can someone else confirm this and update the article if correct? Thanks, --67.186.130.217 (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Da Ali G Show. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050320190417/http://news.independent.co.uk:80/people/profiles/story.jsp?story=553818 to http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/story.jsp?story=553818

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:37, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Da Ali G Show. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140302030755/http://www.fxx.com:80/aligrezurection to http://www.fxx.com/aligrezurection

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:53, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

"Channel 4" ??????????
There is a section that discusses what "is on" channel 4, among other things.

There are many, many channel 4's around the world. In order to be understood, this section should say which channel 4 it is talking about (presumably, in the U.K.). Yes, this can be inferred from context. No, it should not have to be.

Maybe better: Delete this section entirely. Wikipedia does not need to list every television channel and what is scheduled for which channel.2600:1700:E1C0:F340:45B5:9B41:54B:D95E (talk) 19:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Da Ali G Show