text:
Talk:Pathogenic hypothesis of homosexuality

__NOINDEX__

Untitled
Since this article conveniently links to Scientific_theory, it may be worthwhile to review Scientific_theory when considering this article. Speculation or conjecture are not scientific theories. I think the title is hopelessly POV because it incorporates two POV assumptions: (a) that homosexuality is a pathology, and (b) that this conjecture is a scientific theory. --Tabor 16:49, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmmm these are interesting points but I'm not sure. It seems to be a subset of the germ theory of disease, this guy thinks that anything with a high degree of fitness cost that isnt explained by other environmental factors is due to pathogens.  It us undoubtly true that homosexuality has a high fitness cost as gay and lesbian people have what appears to be only 1/5 the number of children compared to heterosexual couples, meaning a fitness cost of 80% - a fitness cost of anything more than 1% is rarely found in a population due to genetics. --ShaunMacPherson 17:23, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * [Edit conflict] But this discounts the value of uncles and aunts in survival of offspring. The so-called "fitness cost" to non-breeders doesn't stop wolves or ants or various birds.  Read something (can't remember where) about the selective advantage of homosexuality in humans, cast in precisely these terms.  Guettarda 17:29, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Were you able to input it in, this is an excellent point. I added the evidence of homosexuality being found in many species observation also, meaning that this pathogen (if it exists) would have to be wide spread and thus mroe easily found, and if it is in many species it would be everywhere and thus would likely affect more than 1-5%(10%?) percent of species' populations. --ShaunMacPherson 17:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The sentence "The assertion that 'evolution would have bred out homosexuality genes' ignores the existence of kin selection;" seems a bit tendentious. Certainly, this assertion discounts the relevance of kin selection, but you are assuming that kin selection is indeed relevant. Are there are any other examples of kin selection causing behaviors that are so obviously disastrous in terms of directly passing on your own genes? - Nat Krause 06:21, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Update 2, I also incorporated counter points such as the ones you've raised right from the article from Out Magazine we've discussed. The idea is out there, let us document it fully, let it be NPOV and raise the issues and problems of this theory. --ShaunMacPherson 17:25, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Classifying as pseudoscience, based on criteria given at Pseudoscience --Tabor 23:13, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I took that out. It's blatantly prejudicial, which can hardly be justified by reference to some other Wikipedia page. - Nat Krause 06:21, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've replaced it - as of now, there's nothing to distinguish this "theory" from cold fusion, creation science or any other pseudoscience. --FCYTravis 20:36, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I believe the psudoscience category should be removed, cold fusion has been discredited' as a theory since it could not be replicated. So far this theory has not been discredited, it is currently based on widely held and credited principles of biology, (it is the principles in aggregate and the conclusion that the proponents say that is what causes the controversy). --ShaunMacPherson 00:06, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Well said. - Nat Krause 05:16, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Pathology
I'm not sure the article or the hypothesis describes homosexuality as a pathology. It says that it is caused by a pathogen—is it possible that it might be associated with some other pathology? in any event, the article appears to defend against charges that homosexuality is a mental disease, whereas, even if Cochran's theory is pathologizing homosexuality, it is talking from a reproductive standpoint and has nothing to do with psychology. - Nat Krause 06:21, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The pathogen aspect is from the hypothizied microorganism, not that homosexual behaviour is a pathogen. If there are wording issues to make sure that this comes across let's make them.  It is also true that this is all about reproduction and does not go into psychology, it is very core biology in that respect, we need an articlea bout fitness level as a percentage too.

 * What I meant was, does the theory claim that homosexuality is a pathology? If something is caused by a pathogen, is it necessarily a pathology? Maybe it's just a semantic problem. We could say Microorganism theory of homosexuality. - Nat Krause 05:16, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes that sounds much much better. Doing so neatly seperates the idea that a microorganism (pathogen) maybe the cause from labeling homosexual behaviour as pathogenic. If you would like to move it using the move ability I would be in agreement. --ShaunMacPherson 13:11, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Merging

 * Removing the merge proposal, as I count it, and I could be wrong, the vote was: 7 Merge, 5 Keep, 2 Delete. As far as I know, and again I could be wrong :o), a super majority of 2/3 is needed. Talk ->

The idea is to develop consensus, and since there was no consensus to merge the article then I believe the status quo should be preserved. As well, the VfD message falsely labeled this as one person's theory which appears to be false. Other people are proponents of the idea such as Paul W. Ewald, a biology professor at Amherst College in Massachusetts.

Please leave your comments here, there was not much discussion on VfD despite me making the above apparent as to why people wanted a merger despite it being a theory that is scientifically sound with more than one proponent. --ShaunMacPherson 22:54, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I have added a {{MergeDisputed}} tag. Please discuss!   Ingoolemo   talk 05:20, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)

 * Scientifically sound? Can you point me towards some evidence of this?  Guettarda 05:24, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)'

 * If you've evidence that it is not feel free to share it, esp. those that which the article deleted.

 * So far as I understand the theory to be it is based on the general fitness theorm of biology / evolution: A gene that has a high fitness cost (a factor reducing ability to reproduce) is rarely found in a given population above 1% as individuals within the population would out complete those who possess the given gene. Therefore if there is a high fitness cost condition found in a population it is likely caused by the environment - likely an insult via a microorganism.  All this 'microorganism theory of homosexuality' does is apply this chain of reasoning to the case of the high fitness cost (80% since it appears only 1 in 5 gay individuals have children) found in the gay human & animal population.

 * Fitness cost is a core idea in biology and seems to be scientfically sound. If anyone does not think fitness cost is a credible concept in biology then include it here and in the article. --ShaunMacPherson 28 June 2005 03:42 (UTC)

 * As I said above, the "fitness cost" argument is meaningless (without experimental data). There's a wealth of work on kin selection, and iirc, there are studies showing an advantage conferred by bachelor uncles.  The fitness cost argument is not a valid argument if it's so easy to refute.  From a scientific point of view this is purely speculative, and in the absence of experimental evidence it is not science.  If the fitness cost argument stood up to scrutiny you would have a nice "just so story", but still not science.  Without it, it's just highly speculative, and betrays a misunderstanding of evolutionary theory.  It does not mean it's wrong or right.  Without solid data, it's just speculation.  Guettarda 28 June 2005 03:52 (UTC)

 * Is string theory meaningless because there is little, if any, empirical evidence to support it? I'd say unverified or unproven is a better term then 'meaningless' unless the arguement itself is logically flawed or based upon unsound scientific principles.  The rest above seems to be variations on the theme of 'meaningless'ness and 'speculation' (repeated 3 times). --ShaunMacPherson 28 June 2005 03:59 (UTC)

 * 1) fitness cost argument is meaningless because it is based on an incomplete knowledge of evolutionary biology - this applies to the "supportive evidence", not the underlying hypothesis

 * If meaningless flows from incompleteness then all of science would be meaningless as science is always incomplete. There could always be additional evidence presented to update any aspect of it. A complete (and perfect?) theory is impossible in science for this very reason so your crituqe seems to be an indictment of all of science. --ShaunMacPherson 29 June 2005 12:03 (UTC)

 * 1) the pathogenic hypothesis is speculative because it isn't supported by either data or solid theory

 * It could be specutlative but if we cast our gaze to the beginning of this section it was about 'scientically sound'. It seems to be a theory can be spectulative and scientifically sound (String Thoery).  As far as I know the speculative nature of this theory has already been introduced into the artile with the phrases such as 'hypothesized microorganism', if that is insufficient for you then by all means change it. --ShaunMacPherson 29 June 2005 12:03 (UTC)

String theory has theoretical support. Some scientists argue that it isn't science, because there is no way to test it. This isn't strong theory. As long as no one bothers to test it though, we are not dealing with science, just speculation. That's the whole point behind the scientific method. Guettarda 28 June 2005 04:18 (UTC)
 * 1) the second "speculative" is just summation by means of reiteration.

 * This theory is linkd to and is a subset of the larger theory that Gregory Cochran was involved with - that microorganisms affect fitness cost i.e. Peptic_ulcer can be caused by Helicobacter pylori instead of simply genes. There is scientific evidence that this condition is caused by a microorganism instead of the view from only a short time ago that the cause was stronlgy believed to be 'stress' or heredity. --ShaunMacPherson 29 June 2005 12:03 (UTC)

The merger discussion was hardly fair, given the way you distorted the sources you cited: claiming Caleb Crain as a Harvard professor; citing material as coming from a published book when it in fact comes from someone's personal web page. You repeatedly refer to Ewald as a "proponent" and "supporter" of the hypothesis, when in fact the only direct published statement from him on the matter is: In a carefully worded e-mail, Ewald, for his part, asserts only that "the argument about infectious causation of homosexuality is a feasible hypothesis and should be treated as such—-no more and no less."  Aside from that mention, all of this is bald speculation by physicist Gregory Cochran. That is why many suggested this material belongs in an article in Gregory Cochran. (cf. Wikipedia's treatment of the fringe "theories" of Lyndon LaRouche, where they are presented in articles about him and his followers, rather than mixed in with accepted political and economic theory.) --Tabor 16:17, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The distortion I remember standing out is that you said that this was a one person theory, that of Cochran, when would appear to be more mainstream then that - but that is neither here nor there. If there is misconceptions, errors and hasty comments about this theory I'd suggest it was from having the article being put up for deletion a scant half an hour after its creation - i'm glad though the talk has moved towards merger instead of out right deletion (censorship?).

 * Since this theory follows core and mainstream biological ideas (the idea that environmental factors can affect behaviour and fitness cost) and is thus not a 'frindge theory'. What it does appear to be is a subset of the germ theory which means it has more than enough merit to stand on it's own.  :It would be useful to have a list of other theories that are environmental in nature (bacteria causing ulcers, the theory of a microorganism causing schizophrenia, any others?).  The germ theory maybe the place for many of these kinds ideas although it would be useful to have more feedback.

 * As for Lyndon LaRouche, he is a conspiracy theory nut whose ideas do not not appear to be mainstream. If you would like to point out anything in this theory that does not conform to core biological tennants (and makes it 'fringe' in your words) then please do so here. --ShaunMacPherson 01:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

If this article is going to be merged with anything, I think it should be Environment, choice, and sexual orientation. This theory is "fringe" in that it's speculative, but it's not really a crackpot theory. According to genetics and sexual orientation, there appears to be relatively solid evidence for a partial genetic component; this theory might be a contender to explain the rest. Or maybe not. But it's interesting to know that it's been proposed. It'd also be interesting to hear more criticism of it. -- Beland 08:52, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Misrepresenting Cochran's work
It seems to misrepresent Cochran's work to single out this example he used, which was only one example within his larger theory. This single example from his speculative theory doesn't seem to be notable enough to have its own article. It seems to be only Cochran and Ewald that have said anything about this example from the theory. In order to avoid misrepresenting Cochran's actual theory, this material should probably be merged into an article on his actual theory.--Nectarflowed T 10:29, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * That statement is a little vague. Do you mean the larger theory of fitness cost stemming from microorganisms as I described above this post?  That maybe an option.  As we know, the microorganism theory of homosexuality is a subset of the larger theory of fitness cost with regards to the environment.  Since high fitness cost genes are not found widly (usually under 1%) in a population then when behaviour or an event occurs that has a high fitness cost it would then fall on the environment as the cause.  This has been shown fairly recently that it is the case with many stomach ulcers being caused by bacteria instead of the classical view of heredity or stress.

 * If someone can list sources of books or articles on this issue I am sure that will help this article out. --ShaunMacPherson 28 June 2005 03:53 (UTC)

 * Sickle cell anaemia has a fitness cost of >1% if considered alone. Why do you keep repeating such an obviously flawed argument?  Guettarda 16:34, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * According to Cochran, sickle cell is by far the most dramatic known case of such a mechanism, and it is linked to an obvious and strong benefit in dealing with one of humanity's most severe infectious diseases. If someone were to propose a similarly strong selection benefit linked to homosexuality, then that hypothesis would compete with Cochran's. However, the hypothetical possibility that someone could develop such an idea is not much of an argument against considering other possibilities. - Nat Krause 17:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * This hypothesis is not, AFAIK, supported by any experimental evidence. The only thing in favour of it is the selection idea - and the selection idea is by no means solid.  Kin selection, on the other hand, has a solid theoretical background - the selective advantage of non-breeding relatives has been demonstrated in bird, wolves and ants.  You share 25% of your genes with your siblings children - improving their odds of survival gives you fitness.  I saw a study (I can't recall where) that found a fitness advantage in having unmarried uncles, iirc.  There's lots of well developed theory in evolutionary biology which could be used to counter this hypothesis.  It does not mean that it is wrong, it simply means that the fitness cost idea is a flawed "proof".  Guettarda 17:31, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I am not sure why you ended your paragraph with the term 'proof', it betrays a misunderstanding many people may have about science that I believe is core to why this issue is not being resolved. 'A proof' is impossible with empiricial observation; the best level of truth that any theory can achieve in science is 'not yet disproven' as at any time evidence (empirical observation) can overturn any aspect of any theory.

 * As for there few evidence for this theory - again that is mentioned in the article since it is only a 'hypothesised' microorganism that is suggested as being the cause. Although in the past other vectors were suggested and then found for similiar cases such Helicobacter pylori causing peptic ulcers that was refound in 1982 .  This connection only made 'strong'ly in 1994  between peptic ulcers and this bacteria.  It would be interesting to mention why it took so long for the connection to be made despite H. pylori being originally discovered in 1875, that may shed light as to the issue as to this microorganism, if it exists, is hard to find, how one would go about finding it.

 * This theory also has an interesting explanation as to why some socities have low levels of homosexual behaviour while others have higher amounts, if it was gene based entirely one may suspect that homosexual behaviour would be fairly uniform around the world for human populations which seems not to be the case. Explaining that difference can be done a number of ways, one of which is via this theory. --ShaunMacPherson 02:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Kin selection & the variety of homosexual behaviour / culture
Kin selection is an interesting idea on fitness cost, is it covered well in the article? The article isn't being corrected it seems, someone will have a task traslating our discussion into the article :).

 * As well, I recall one theory of gay (male) behaviour is that males may form coalitions in order to better find females. Since males are usually in direct competition with eachother, genetically speaking, such a coalition must have a reinforcer in the form of a relationship.  From that standpoint mating, even 1/5 of the time, is better than mating 0 times so gay behaviour maybe a backup strategy.

 * Another interesting topic to be covered is that gay and lesbian individuals maybe 'social glue' to better intergrate socieity (i.e. Bonobo).

 * As well, there seems to be a continum of gay/lesbian behaviour which may or may not be accounted for by this theory.

It would be useful to start finding documentation from journals on this issue so we can get some concerete sources, although sexual research is very much underfunded so finding useful sources maybe difficult. It is our job to present this idea NPOV, not really prove or disprove its merits. It seems that the idea is mainstream enough to justify having its own article (and if you disagree I asked anyone to offer their rational how this theory doesn't conform to core biological ideas or hos it is 'fringe') so now we need to quote what people are saying about the issue.--ShaunMacPherson 02:25, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Evolution and reproductive fitness
I removed some problem sections...

 * (well above the esimated 80% fitness level since it has been esimated that only gay and lesbian couples only have 1/5 as many children as heterosexual couples)

This does come from, but I don't think the author is a scientist, and this inference doesn't necessarily follow when you're talking about evolutionary pressures. Modern LBGT people have modern medicine to assist them in having children that share their genes. Our cave-dwelling ancestors didn't. It's also unclear to me that the "San Francisco study published in 1981" is actually referring to biological children. Clearly, whether or not homosexuals mate in the normal fashion is also dependent on social factors, which are hard to nail down. Plus, there are theories which suggest there may be some selective advantage to certain homosexuality-inducing genes, so the 80% figure could really be off in either direction. -- Beland 08:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * That is a good idea although I would not remove it entirely - we can say things such as 'determing the exact fitness cost among gay and lesbian individuals from not havign as many children is hard to determine but estimates range from x to 80% (then quote the source for 80%). I'd guess the number is quite close to 80% even when factoring in kin selection. Siblings only have 50% the genes so even if they were to help one child survive 100% of the time (like being able to stop disease, accidents, everything) then it seems (?) the fitness cost would still be 50% (assuming they had no children) although the math seems to get much more complicated when dealing with multiple siblings with multiple children.

 * I've written the individual from that link you've given about the 80% figure and they are very cooperative and helpful if you'd like to ask them where that figure is from (I would not want to bug them further since I've asked for clarification about some points already :) ).

 * I am not quite sure why there is an issue about 'biological children', when dealing with core ideas such as fitness cost then reproduction (though children primarily or relatives) is key. The article already mentions kin selection, and looking at it it seems unlikely (unless a gay or lesbian indvidual helps their relatives double the amount of children they have) that kind selection will make up for having few if any children (but still is important to mention, I'd discount it more though and look for sources to confirm this). --ShaunMacPherson 12:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The assertion that "evolution would have bred out homosexuality genes" ignores the existence of kin selection; individuals share half their genes with their own offspring, but share one quarter of their genes with their siblings' progeny. The benefit provided by non-breeding uncles and aunts may compensate for the associated fitness cost.

To my understanding, "gay uncle" theory is not taken seriously by mainstream researchers. Genetics and sexual orientation explains why. -- Beland 08:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Another objection to this idea is the observation that homosexuality is found in many species of animals, and that such a pathogen would have to be wide spread. A pathogen so ubiquitous would likely fairly easily found and affect a larger percentage of the species' populations.

Reading Cochran more closely, this might be attacking a strawman. I don't think he's saying that it's cause by a pathogen, necessarily, in species where it is rare. Which he claims is all of them except humans and sheep, though I don't know if that's disputed. -- Beland 08:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The aguement is in a species (or human culture) where gay/lesbian beahviour is rare the microorganism is absent / rare. Where the microorganism is present there is more gay and lesbian behaviour which can explain why homosexuality varies so much, apparently, among different cultures (examples given in the links as 'bush people' not knowing what homosexuality is / was).--ShaunMacPherson 12:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

I'd also argue about adding this theory into the gay gene abortion debate. If genes are not the cause of gay / lesbian behaviour then it should be mentioned that selective abortion will not be possible. This issue is becoming important as it seems featuses that will likey have aspeger's syndrome, autism, spinabifida are at increasing chance of being aborted. There was an interesting article about Bill Gates possibly being aborted in today's age since he may have aspeger's syndrome (or so the article discusses). --ShaunMacPherson 12:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Todo
It would be interesting to get a copy of the February 1999 story from the Atlantic Monthly, and also more original publications by these Cochran and Ewald and any other advocates. -- Beland 01:36, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I'd help in doing this, it seems a very useful project. Perhaps a Wikibook would also be useful, for some reason I have an urge for an original research project. Perhaps a subpage called references were we can list references. The Fact and Reference Check (FARC) project has useful styling tips and tools for going about making a list of references, and examples of articles that have been referenced.

Refeferencing an article that is controversial is useful, and interesting as you say, since it is easier to be NPOV when describing what others' have said. --ShaunMacPherson 12:03, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Pathogenic theory gains Nobel Prize respectibility
The 2005 Nobel_Prize_in_Physiology_or_Medicine was awarded to the pathogenic theory of bacteria causing stomach ulcers. I was somewhat surprised in reading up on this that the scientific community was very much opposed to this idea, only a few decades ago. Even the prize mentions the 'dogma' they had to fight against in presenting their idea, I am happy they won out in the end.

I believe that such dogma still exists against pathogenic theories in general and is relevant to this article. I'll probably add a blurb in a bit after checking to see if anyone has any ideas on how to best word it. --ShaunMacPherson 10:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Intro
The intro needs rewriting. It's clumsily worded, and hard for the layman to figure out what point exactly is being made. Here's my guess:

 * It's the theory that homosexuality is caused by germs not genes. The theory argues that genes could not be the cause, so it must be something in the environment.

Stated like this, it's much easier to see the weakness in the theory: why have they overlooked childhood upbringing, for example? Uncle Ed 17:55, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Paul Ewald
Is at Louisville not Brown. He used to be at Amherst, I don't think he has ever been at Brown. 152.17.49.136 14:41, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality in titling & such
I think part of the concern about this article has to do with the way that the hypothesis is described. Consider the following statements:

 * Homosexuality is a disease or illness.
 * Homosexuality is caused by a pathogen.
 * Homosexuality is caused by a virus.
 * Homosexuality is caused by a symbiote.

Clearly these have different implications.

Although the word "pathogen" comes across as more neutral than the word "disease" or "germ", it still means "disease-causing organism". Our article pathogen defines it as "a biological agent that causes disease or illness to its host." Thus, even using the word "pathogen" carries the implicit claim that the organism's effect is a disease or illness. --FOo 02:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't believe it is correct to ban a scientific hypothesis from Wiki because some people might find it offensive. Everything is offensive to someone.  What if we let the Creation Science crowd ban articles on Evolution because they found it offensive?  The Social Controversy section is a good place to put quotes and information from respected thinkers who criticize this hypothesis because they find it offensive.  --funkymunki 09:54, 4 Aug 2007

 * Uh, dude, who's talking about "banning a scientific hypothesis from Wiki"? I was talking about changing the terms in which we describe that hypothesis. --FOo 20:04, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

 * How do you remove all reference to germs from a germ theory? --funkymunki 09:13, 7 Aug 2007

 * Ok, maybe I misunderstood. You don't want to remove ideas like germs from this article.  You'd like germs to be presented in a positive light.  --funkymunki 09:29, 7 Aug 2007

Talk page deletion
I wonder what you think about having this talk page deleted? The original article was merged a decade ago and this article still comes up in Google. Sxologist (talk) 10:16, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I added a "noindex" template for that issue. You may be interested in this discussion as well: Crossroads -talk- 16:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Maryam Rajavi

WP:POVPUSH problems
what is going on? Why are you promoting the same minor view in these BLPs? ParadaJulio (talk) 09:59, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

 * What's the minor view exactly? Iskandar323 (talk) 11:03, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * It appears something is happening in Mehdi Abrishamchi and Massoud Rajavi. Alex-h (talk) 13:18, 11 June 2023 (UTC)

 * your edit added that This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity". Following my notification here, it appears you changed it to the two co-leaders would marry in an act that was framed as being for the benefit of the organization while adding this BBC source to it? How does the BBC source support this was "a matter of revolutionary necessity"? ParadaJulio (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Or that this was framed as being for the benefit of the organization? ParadaJulio (talk) 15:03, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * @ParadaJulio: Why are you deleting the subject's marriage? This in the infobox and lead; it needs to be in the body. See MOS:INFOBOX and MOS:LEAD. This is core biographical information and the obvious need to have it in the body is pretty simple stuff. The only mystery here is why anybody would delete this. The last person who did so is a now blocked disruptive editor. I hope you have a very good explanation as to why you are repeating the actions of said disruptive editor. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:19, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The BBC is the source for the same information in the lead. The quote is the New Yorker. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Please, elaborate on why you are objecting to changes here. What you are doing here, jumping to accusations without any substantive discussion of content, is not tolerable. MarioGom (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikivoicing that "This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being 'a matter of revolutionary necessity'", which is based solely on one source, contradicts WP:NPOV. Alex-h (talk) 21:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Only one source is cited here, but as it has been discussed in other occasions at the MEK talk page, there are quite a few reliable sources stating the same. Either that it was an ideological marriage, that the marriage was needed to deepen the "ideological revolution", etc. We can discuss if there are enough sources or if there are contradictory sources, but this is hardly an WP:NPOV issue, when we're talking about something reflecting in reliable sources. MarioGom (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * And regardless, these would be reasons to delete the supplementary sentence about the precise reasonsing for the marriage, not the core biographical information of the marriage itself - however, since it was a deeply political/ideological marriage, that is referenced in almost all the relevant sources too. Here are more relevant sources for your perusal (that's three ideological explanations, one cult/wife-swapping):
 * Rajavi, as the head of the organization, launched an “ideological revolution”, banning marriage and enforcing mandatory “eternal” divorce on all members, who were required to separate from their husbands or wives. He married one of the new divorcees, Maryam Azodanlu, who became, in effect, his chief lieutenant and took his name.
 * At the Neshest it took Rajavi five days to convince members of his main revolutionary demand - that they should divorce their spouses. He wanted to ensure that members’ sexual identity would be denied and thus bring about their complete devotion to himself as their leader... Massoud and Maryam Rajavi were married in February 1985. Members were given an ideological explanation: “Maryam chose to divorce her husband in favour of her marriage to the Mojahedin’s ideological leader so that she could work with him as cooperating leading partners.” (Cohen, 2009, pp.32-39)
 * the Mojahedin had metamorphized from a mass movement into an inward-looking sect in many ways similar to religious cults found the world over. This metamorphosis rapidly crystallized in early 1985 with Rajavi’s new marriage...Until then, Mojahedin activists had known Maryam Azodanlu as merely the younger sister of a veteran member, and the wife of Mehdi Abrishamchi, one of Rajavi’s close colleagues…proclamation also mentioned almost in passing that Maryam Azodanlu and Mehdi Abrishamchi had recently divorced in order to pave the way for this 'great revolution...It smacked of wife-swapping, especially when Abrishamchi announced his own marriage to Khiabani’s younger sister... (Abrahamian, 1989, pp.251-255)
 * Iskandar323 (talk) 06:13, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Iskandar323, you cited the same Guardian source twice. Which of these additional sources support the text This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity"? And please provide the page numbers from Abrahamian's and Cohen's quotes, I have not been able to find them in those books. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, you have page numbers. You still haven't explained why you reverted the entire edits, including the core biographical information, instead of just partially reverting the part that you thought was not supported. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:37, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
 * See WP:CYCLE, which helped us understand that:
 * You wikivoiced This was justified on the basis of the new relationship being "a matter of revolutionary necessity", even though it's a statement from a single source.
 * You provided other sources for the statement, but they also don't seem to support it.
 * Without resorting to further unnecessary hostility, elaborate on what (WP:NPOV) information you think the article is missing. ParadaJulio (talk) 14:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The details of the subject's divorce, as already mentioned in the infobox, and yet currently absent from the body, which provides zero explanation as to how she transitioned from one marriage to the next. Iskandar323 (talk) 04:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What is mentioned in the infobox is that Maryam Rajavi was married to Mehdi Abrishamchi from 1980 to 1985, and to Massoud Rajavi from 1985 (dis. 2003). Apparently she also has a daughter. We could create a section about =Personal life= with this kind of neutral information like in Massoud Rajavi's article. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, you could and should have done that at the time nearly a week ago if all you objected to was the explanation, instead of what you did, which was blanket reverting core facts. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Prior discussion was necessary to identify the precise problems with your edits. ParadaJulio (talk) 15:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
 * What? If you cannot identify any precise problem with an edit, you should not revert it. What you are describing, preemptively reverting just in case you later think of a reason, is highly disruptive. MarioGom (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * There is nothing "disruptive" about following WP:CYCLE, which allows communication between editors, and particularly when Iskandar was wikivoicing information from one source and adding new sources that did not support that statement. ParadaJulio (talk) 12:39, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * No. It is disruptive when you revert and do not clearly explain why. It took a long conversation to gather the rationale, and that is a waste of time for everyone. MarioGom (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * There were conflated problems with Iskandar323's edits and a discussion was required. In the future (and when possible) I will try listing each individual issue separately, but the WP:BURDEN is on the editor making the changes (not on the editor who’s trying to disentangle them). ParadaJulio (talk) 15:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You barely even pointed out a problem. Your obfuscating communication style is the primary problem in this thread. You could have easily tweaked my edits, but instead you reverted and wasted time byavoiding explaining your actions. You need to A) AGF (big time) and B) be an actual collegiate editor who tries to work with other editors, not waste their/community time. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:13, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Maryam Rajavi


text:
Portal:Aviation/Anniversaries/June 10

June 10

 * 2012 – The Free Syrian Army reports that Syrian government attack helicopters have helped drive its forces out of the government' air defense base at Al-Ghantu, which they had briefly captured.

 * 2012 – A Kenya Police Eurocopter AS350 crashes on a hill in the Kibiku area of the Ngong Forest just outside Nairobi, Kenya, killing all six people on board. Among the fatalities are Kenya's Minister of Interior Security and likely presidential candidate George Saitoti and Assistant Minister of Interior Security Joshua Orwa Ojode.

 * 2011 – Syrian government attack helicopters go into action during Syrian Army military operations against the rebel stronghold of Jisr ash-Shugur. The operations will conclude successfully on 12 June.

 * 2011 – The Government of Norway announces that it will begin a gradual withdrawal of the six Royal Norwegian Air Force F-16 Fighting Falcons it has committed to Operation Unified Protector, the NATO intervention in the Libyan Civil War.

 * 2008 – Sudan Airways Flight 109, an Airbus A310, crashes at Khartoum International Airport and breaks apart, catching fire. 30 deaths are confirmed, 6 passengers are listed as missing.

 * 1999 – Canadian CF-188 Hornets began Operation Joint Guardian during the Kosovo Air War.

 * 1990 – British Airways Flight 5390, a BAC One-Eleven, suffers explosive decompression over Didcot, Oxfordshire, England when one of the front windscreen panes blows out. The captain is partially sucked out of the cockpit, but a flight attendant manages to keep his unconscious body from falling from the aircraft. The first officer lands the aircraft safely at Southampton Airport. All on board survive.

 * 1989 – First female USAF test pilot. Capt Jacquelyn S Parker graduated from the Air Force Test Pilot School at Edwards AFB CA.

 * 1987 – The Boeing Model 360 makes its first flight. The tandem rotored helicopter served as an Advanced Technology Demonstrator of many new design concepts.

 * 1967 – First flight of the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-23 prototype 23-11/1

 * 1964 – First Lockheed XV-4A Hummingbird, 62-4503, (originally designated VZ-10) crashes, killing civilian Army test pilot. Aircraft had just transitioned from conventional to vertical flight at 3,000 feet (914 m) when control was lost. Airframe came down between Dobbins AFB and Woodstock, Georgia, injuring one civilian on ground.

 * 1960 – Trans Australia Airlines Flight 538, a Fokker F-27, crashes into the ocean near Mackay, Queensland, Australia, killing all 29 on board in Australia's worst civilian air disaster. This crash was responsible for the mandatory installation of cockpit voice recorders in airliners in Australia, followed by the rest of the world.

 * 1953 – The final experimental test flight for the turbojet powered #3 Douglas D-558-I Skystreak is flown by A. Scott Crossfield.

 * 1944 – Flying from Italy carrying one 1,000-lb (454-kg) bomb each, 46 P-38 Lightning fighters of the U. S. Army Air Forces 82nd Fighter Group make a very-long-range fighter-bomber attack on the Romanian-American Oil Refinery at Ploesti, Romania. They destroy 23 German aircraft in exchange for the loss of 22 P-38 s.

 * 1944 – RCAF fighter wings 144, 127 and 143 moved to France.

 * 1943 – In one of the heaviest and most concentrated air attacks thus far in World War II, Allied aircraft drop 1,571 tons (1,425,202 kg) of bombs on Pantelleria.

 * 1942 – An U. S. Army Air Forces LB-30 Liberator on a reconnaissance flight discovers that Japanese forces have occupied Kiska in the Aleutian Islands.

 * 1940 – Italy declares war on Britain and its allies and begins an aerial assault on Malta.

 * 1936 – U.S. Navy Spartan NP-1, BuNo 3824, assigned at NAS Anacostia, Anacostia, D.C., ditches in the Back River, Virginia, after suffering engine failure following take-off from Langley Field, Virginia. Pilot J. Ware is KWF.

 * 1919 – Ruth Law of the United States breaks the women’s altitude record, flying to 14,700 feet (4,481 m).

 * 1913 – Marcel Brindejone des Moulinais wins the Pommeroy cup in Warsaw for the longest flight between sunrise and sunset, flying 900 miles from Paris.

 * 1912 – The Austro-Hungarian submarine U-5 tows a kite balloon, apparently to determine the best coloration for submarines to avoid detection while underwater. Other than the experimental use of balloons from ships to bombard Venice in 1849 by its predecessor the Austrian Navy, it is the only operation of an observation balloon by the Austro-Hungarian Navy.

 * 1908 – First flying club and civil airport established. Aeronautical Society chartered at New York City, and Morris Park air field established.

title: Portal:Aviation/Anniversaries/June 10


text:
Talk:Nucleoplasm

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JmwBIO401.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Erinmwolfe.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:28, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

8 Jun 2005
"viscous solid"? Something's wrong there I think. I changed it. --Kinglz 16:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

nucleoplasm
The page should be more informative and interesting. Adding more information will improve the performance and reliability of people. Access for other users should be made possible Joel James Philip (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

26 November 2021
The nucleoplasm makes up the most prominent organelle of the Eukaryotic cell, the nucleus. It is enclosed by the nuclear envelope, also known as the nuclear membrane[1]. The nucleoplasm resembles the cytoplasm of a eukaryotic cell in that it is a gel-like substance found within a membrane, although the nucleoplasm only fills out the space in the nucleus and has its own unique functions. The nucleoplasm suspends structures within the nucleus that are not membrane-bound and is responsible for maintaining the shape of the nucleus[1]. The structures suspended in the nucleoplasm include DNA, nuclear bodies, nucleoporins, and nuclear speckles[1].

Nucleoplasm Role in the Cell There are many important cell functions that take place in the nucleus, more specifically in the nucleoplasm. The main function of the nucleoplasm is to provide the proper environment for essential processes that take place in the nucleus and to store the structures that are used in these processes[1]. In fact, the nucleoplasm stores about 34% of proteins found in the human body[1]. These proteins take part in transcription and gene regulation in the nucleoplasm[1]. Proteins located in the nucleoplasm are involved in the activation of genes that are used in the cell cycle[2]. Some nucleoporins which typically make up the nuclear pore, can be mobile and participate in the regulation of gene expression in the nucleoplasm[2][3]. The nuclear pore is where molecules travel from inside the nucleoplasm to the cytoplasm and vice versa[3]. The nucleoplasm is also a route for many molecules to travel through[3]. Smaller molecules are able to pass freely through the nuclear pore to get into and out of the nucleoplasm, while larger proteins need the help of receptors on the surface of the nuclear envelope[3].

References “Nucleoplasm.” The Human Cell in Nucleoplasm - The Human Protein Atlas, https://www.proteinatlas.org/humanproteome/cell/nucleoplasm.

Kalverda, B., et al. (2010). Nucleoporins Directly Stimulate Expression of Developmental and Cell-Cycle Genes Inside the Nucleoplasm. Science Direct, 140, 306-383.

Khan, A. U., et al. (2020). Role of Nucleoporins and Transport Receptors in Cell Differentiation. Frontiers in Physiology.

"Nucleoplasm". Kalverda, B. (2010). "Nucleoporins Directly Stimulate Expression of Developmental and Cell-Cycle Genes Inside the Nucleoplasm". Science Direct. 140: 306–383 – via Science Direct. Khan, U. (2020). "Role of Nucleoporins and Transport Receptors in Cell Differentiation". Frontiers in Physiology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JmwBIO401 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Course Assignment
This article is being improved for a class project under the supervision of Dr. Lesly Temesvari (Username: LTEMESV) at Clemson University.TylerClemson (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nucleoplasm


text:
Talk:Religious right

Why is the main article not capitalized (Religious right, to which Religious Right redirects), but the bold first-sentence term clearly is? AFAIK the "Right" as in the conservative Right has always been capitalized in its noun form, though I could be wrong. Just curious about the apparent inconsistency. -- PhilipR 16:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I removed several links because they are not representative of large or well-known critical groups that oppose the Religious Right. Furthermore, this page is to explain the debate over the term, and the Main page is Christian Right.--Cberlet 00:33, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Note to anonymous editor. Your text is very good, but you are putting it on the wrong page. I moved the text to the Christian Right page.--Cberlet 02:19, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Jewish right?
What the hell? There aren't enough Jewish wing-nuts in the US to make them a faction within the American political spectrum. If anything, pro-Israeli people and the Religious Rights have common interests and common foreign policy goals.SteveSims 06:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Who is Sensei-98?
Article begins with "Sensei-98 states:...". What this means? Who is Sensei-98? Saigon from europe 21:39, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

It would seem to me much of the commentary about the "Religious Right" is nothing but a strawman.

Page is not about the Christian Right
This page is not the page for extended text on the Christian Right. This is a page about the Religious Right. If folks want to claim there are similar issues across the Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and Hindu right (and there are), then they need to provide cites. The University of Chicago studies on fundamentalism are a good start, as is the book by Karen Armstrong. I have cut all the uncited text and the material that was really about the Christian Right. Let's add cited material only. As the lead suggests, this term itself is controversial.--Cberlet 13:57, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Jewish Task Force
"…the Jewish Task Force is the most activist in religious right activity…"??? Is this to be understood as saying that the (tiny, obscure) Jewish Task Force are more activist than, say Focus on Family? If so, then this is absurd. If not, then this is poorly worded. - Jmabel | Talk 23:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Randall Balmers new book talks about the origin of the religious right
COMMONWEALTH CLUB SPEAKER ARCHIVE Recorded Jul 11 2006 An Evangelical's Lament on Politicized Religion RANDALL BALMER http://www.commonwealthclub.org/archive/06/06-07balmer-audio.html

Randall Balmer "Thy Kingdom Come" 7/30/2006 Randall Balmer is an evangelical Christian. He is also a liberal, and a Democrat. And he deplores the way the religious right has, as he puts it, "hijacked" his faith for their own political purposes. Balmer, the editor-at-large for Christianity Today, makes an impassioned call for a return to the true evangelical principles of his faith in his book "Thy Kingdom Come." http://www.podfeed.net/podcast/Eye+on+Books+BOOKCAST/1353 Aihyah | Talk 14:07 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Christian Writers as Category??
The last time I looked at the Christian Writer Category page it was an alphabetical list of individual persons, not groups. So I removed "Christian Writers" as one of the categories. Was it logical for me to do so? If not I'm open for discussion :-) --Awinger48 18:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Why the flag?
Specific complaints?--Cberlet 03:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Deletion of Jewish Chunk
"While a lonely voice on the political and religious spectrum, the Jewish Task Force is the most activist in religious right activity. While organisations like "Jews for Morality","Jews for Life," "Toward Tradition" and the "International Committee for Truth about the Holocaust" do exist, these groups are mostly used for commentary. All criticize liberalism, and liberal Jews within Reform, Reconstructionist and Conservative Judaism."

That seemed fairly biased and had several sweeping generalizations. I stuck it here so that if someone wants to do something with it, they can.Minidoxigirli 21:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Why the "religious right" does not call itself that
A religious group that is socially conservative is thought to be part of the "religious right". The Catholic Church is a religious group that is socially conservative, and so would be called, by that definition, a part of the "religious right". However, since its teachings on our responsibility to care for the poor, the sick, the imprisioned, the weak, look not to the invisible hand of the free market, but to visible hands, one may see a "leftist" influence in the Church. Hence, "religious right" is an incomplete description. A statement in 1985 from Cardinal Bernardin:
 * Martin | talk • contribs 06:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Changed from:

The term is used most often by the political left and generally carries a negative connotation; it is rarely if ever, used by the Religious Right to describe themselves.

 * to :

The term is used most often by the political left, pejoritively.

Sorry I did not include this comment earlier, to, possibly, avoid the reversion.

Martin | talk • contribs 06:46, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Cites and references
The Wiki cite police have decreed that rather than relying om the many references already on this page, we apparently must begin using one of the many obscure and tedious citation systems competing for supremacy here on Wikipedia. Does anyone have a preference? We should only use one citation system.--Cberlet 17:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Citation check: Does anyone have a clue what these references have to do with this page?:
 * Shapiro, Ben. Brainwashed: How Universities Indoctrinate America's Youth (ISBN 0-7852-6148-6), 2004.
 * Shapiro, Ben. Porn Generation: How Social Liberalism Is Corrupting Our Future (ISBN 0-89526-016-6), Regnery, 2005.

If there is no response, they should be deleted.--Cberlet 17:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It's hard for me to believe that you are serious. What part of it don't you understand? Shapiro is one of several people of the Jewish faith that promote the cultural conservative values (as Shapiro does in the mentioned cites) that are very similar to those promoted by conservative Christians. Pollinator 07:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

 * And yet there is no mention on the page of this fact, which, if you tickle the keyboard and insert it, will explain to the reader why these cites are there. Thanks. I am just trying to start the process of adding more intext citations to satisfy the citation police. It is a useful addition to the page. I recognized the other references. Too much coffee? :-)  --Cberlet 13:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

New Zealand section
I found this section to be more than a little odd. It is unsourced, and narrowly concentrates on the opposition to a single piece of legislation by a very small minority of New Zealanders (only 0.7% of NZers identify as Muslims, and "conservative Muslims" would therefore be an even smaller fraction). It would be better to concentrate on the likes of the Destiny Church (and its unsuccesful political offshoot) or even the Christian Heritage Party, over a wider range of issues. But, as the main New Zealand article states: "Religion does not play a major role in New Zealand public life. Overtly Christian-based political parties such as Christian Heritage and Destiny have been unsuccessful, and the religion (or lack of religion) of political leaders - while generally known - is considered by most to be a private matter. Although faith-based lobby groups exist, political parties have recently been harmed more than helped by their support." Hrafn42 13:16, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I tracked the New Zealand section to this edit. It is clear from the original version that cross-religion Religious Right cooperation is a "smaller" issue in New Zealand than in "the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom" -- so why is NZ spun out into its own section?

The material on NZ was originally added in this edit. It works reasonably well as part of a contrast between NZ and other English-speaking countries (though needs citations), but is completely dysfunctional when stuck out on its own. Hrafn42 14:44, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation and Article name
I first came across this article when following a link from an article on a conservative Christian activist. It occurs to me that most references to the 'Religious Right' will be to the Christian Right. Would it be appropriate to rename this article to '(Non-Christian) Religious Right' (or perhaps '(Pan-religious) Religious Right') and create a disambiguation page at 'Religious Right' both pointing to the Christian Right & this article? This would probably save a lot of confusion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hrafn42 (talk • contribs) 15:50, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
 * I think that a lot of the information on the Christian right article should be moved here, and the Christian article should just cover the information specific to Christianity. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 15:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Cutlure wars reference
Does the (non-Christian) Religious Right have any significant involvement in the (almost exclusively American) Culture war? If not, then I would suggest that discussion of this would be more appropriately made in the Christian right article, and thus the deletion of the following statement: "The disagreements between the Religious Right and feminist, gay and social liberal activists are sometimes referred to as the Culture War." Hrafn42 05:25, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger or Deletion?
Given that there is virtually no content in this article that is not either unreferenced, or as closely connected with the Christian right as it is with the (non-Christian) Religious right, I would suggest either merging it with that article or deletion entirely. Hrafn42 05:57, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I would support a redirect to Christian right . As far as I know the term religious right is very rarely used to describe Hindu nationalism, Islamism, Millenarianism and Religious Zionism. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I would prefer disambiguation. It is not a valid objection to a disambiguation page to state that it has "virtually no content": it isn't supposed to. dab (𒁳) 19:08, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

sorry!
Poemisaglock 18:30, 26 June 2007 (UTC) sorry about all the posts. shouldn't have done that but i just the religious right to no end+they really are unresponsive like forever on the static apnea page

Religious Left (disambiguation page)
Why isn't there a Religious Left article? The Christian Left article contains all the other like factions within the article, so why must the Religious Right have it's own article? Make no sense. -- T HE F OUNDERS I NTENT  TALK 13:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Seconded. This needs to go to a review. (Criticisms of wikipedia) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottre (talk • contribs) 06:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Islamism
Why is Islamism in this disambig list? It could be considered under the Religious left, as seen in this book published by the Yale University Press. Yet, at the same time Islamism is listed as religious right in this book. So do the reliable sources agree whether it is religious right, or religious left?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:39, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, the source you cite as placing Islamism on the left places it firmly on the right, stating so several times including on the page that you linked. It points out that Islam has some supporters on the left, but definitely that it itself is on the right. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:43, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

DISAMBIG must be justifiable via citations
This page is not a page to add social phenomena you wish to characterize as right wing. Devilishlyhandsome (talk) 00:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Religious right


text:
Talk:Thriller fiction

If you are looking for a great thriller check out: "A Tourist in the Yucatan" Wow!

Merge
Is their a need to have this page and Thriller? Whats the difference they both just seem to be two different approaches to the same topic.. its a little confusing. I vote they be merged unless their is a reason not to. Also why is seuxal thriller not mentioned? Is not classed as a *real* thriller? - UnlimitedAccess 16:51, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Thriller fiction


text:
Equatorial Africa

Equatorial Africa is an ambiguous term that sometimes is used to refer either to the equatorial region of sub-Saharan Africa traversed by the Equator, more broadly to tropical Africa or in a biological and geo-environmental sense to the intra-tropical African rainforest region.

title: Equatorial Africa


text:
User talk:Atwine

Hi,

Thanks for your contributions to Mbarara. I cannot find any websites that says that Ibanda and Isingoro are new districts; there is nothing on the Ugandan government or newspaper websites and relevant Google hits. I have thus removed that specific piece of information. If I have missed a supporting official website or news report, please add a link to it from the article and re-add the information.

Thanks and happy editing. Let me add the official welcome below.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -   BanyanTree 16:52, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

title: User talk:Atwine


text:
Talk:Islam in Tunisia

Verifiability
Last statement : "There were reports..." is not backed by any external links or consultable facts so information may not be true/accurate!!

Is there really an Islam in Tunisia...
I doubt it, from 18 years living here, I can affirm there isn't

True practicing individuals are rare and heavily watched by the goverment, and are sorta of outcast from the rest of the population

They are generally not liked and regarded as dangerous and/or twisted extremists

Although there are some cities which appear to be concentration points for these people, but police is watching them non stop, 24/7 especially Thursday and Friday, 150,000 officer in this virginia-sized country, you know what I'm saying

high school institutions forbid hijab among female students and requires them to remove it in order to attend, but these cases are really rare since most students have more of a european fashion :)

 * You need to provide a reliable source to verify your claims, Original research is not accepted. Sharveet (talk) 14:03, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

non-Muslim name
The Government does not allow the use of foreign names. Any Arab name with a respected meaning that will not cause problems for the child in the future is accepted. So we should say non-Arabic name and not non-Muslim name, because they are totally different. I think there is a law that regulate this, I will try to cite it as soon as possible. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bestofmed (talk • contribs) 16:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Please people, if you're going to add things like a "factual" mark (noting that a reference is needed, try actually READING the references at the bottom! It's clear that a previous author used the State Department report in citing some issues with birth certificates and names, amongst interfaith parents. If you have the time to add a correction mark, you have the time to read and check the references already left for you! Geez Louise. 129.7.93.219 21:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Photo of "Mosquée Ennasr"
Can a local please confirm -- I recall this mosque being named Essalaam, and it's located in Ennasr, not Ariana, yes? --Dupes (talk) 20:47, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Islam in Tunisia. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.kairouan.org/en/culture/unesco.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629173030/http://archnet.org/library/dictionary/entry.jsp?entry_id=DIA0005&mode=full to http://archnet.org/library/dictionary/entry.jsp?entry_id=DIA0005&mode=full

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) 09:14, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Islam in Tunisia


text:
Marsha P. Johnson

Marsha P. Johnson (August 24, 1945 – July 6, 1992) was an American gay liberation activist and self-identified drag queen. Known as an outspoken advocate for gay rights, Johnson was one of the prominent figures in the Stonewall uprising of 1969.

Johnson was a founding member of the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) and co-founded the radical activist group Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR), alongside close friend Sylvia Rivera. Popular in New York's gay community, Johnson was also active in the City's art scene, modeling for Andy Warhol and appearing onstage with the drag performance troupe Hot Peaches. Johnson was known as the "mayor of Christopher Street" for being a welcoming presence in the streets of Greenwich Village. Beginning in 1987, Johnson was an AIDS activist with ACT UP.

Johnson's body was found floating in the Hudson River in 1992. While initially ruled a suicide by the New York City Police Department (NYPD), controversy and protest followed the case, resulting in it eventually being re-opened as a possible homicide.

Early life
Marsha P. Johnson was born Malcolm Michaels Jr. on August 24, 1945, in Elizabeth, New Jersey, to father Malcolm Michaels Sr., an assembly line worker at General Motors, and mother Alberta Claiborne, a housekeeper. Johnson was raised alongside six siblings, and the family attended Mount Teman African Methodist Episcopal Church.  Commenting on this upbringing, Johnson said, "I got married to Jesus Christ when I was sixteen years old, still in high school."

Johnson first began wearing dresses at the age of five but stopped temporarily due to harassment by boys who lived nearby. In a 1992 interview, Johnson described being the young victim of rape by a thirteen-year-old boy. After this, Johnson described the idea of being gay as "some sort of dream", rather than something that seemed possible, and so chose to remain sexually inactive until leaving for New York City at age 17. Johnson's mother reportedly said that being homosexual was like being "lower than a dog", but Johnson said that Johnson was unaware of the LGBT community. Johnson's mother also encouraged them to find a "billionaire" boyfriend or husband to take care of (Johnson) for life, a goal they often talked about.

After graduating from Edison High School (now the Thomas A. Edison Career and Technical Academy) in Elizabeth in 1963, Johnson left home for New York with $15 and a bag of clothes. Johnson waited tables after moving to Greenwich Village in 1966. After Johnson began spending time with the street hustlers near the Howard Johnson's restaurant at Sixth Avenue and 8th Street, Johnson's life changed. Johnson came out and said, "my life has been built around sex and gay liberation, being a drag queen" and sex work.

Performance work and identity
Johnson initially used the moniker "Black Marsha", but later decided on the drag queen name "Marsha P. Johnson", getting Johnson from the Howard Johnson's restaurant on 42nd Street, stating that the P stood for "pay it no mind" and used the phrase sarcastically when questioned about gender, saying "it stands for 'pay it no mind'". Johnson said the phrase once to a judge, who was amused by it, leading to Johnson's release. Johnson variably identified as gay, as a transvestite, and as a queen (referring to drag queen or "street queen"). According to Susan Stryker, a professor of human gender and sexuality studies at the University of Arizona, Johnson's gender expression could be called gender non-conforming; Johnson never self-identified with the term transgender, and the term was also not in broad use during Johnson's lifetime.

The definitions used by Johnson and Sylvia Rivera were not always the same as those documented in the more mainstream literature of the era. For instance, Rivera insisted on claiming transvestite solely for use by gay people, writing in the essay "Transvestites: Your Half Sisters and Half Brothers of the Revolution": "Transvestites are homosexual men and women who dress in clothes of the opposite sex." In an interview with Allen Young, in Out of the Closets: Voices of Gay Liberation, Johnson discussed being a member of the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (STAR), saying, "A transvestite is still like a boy, very manly looking, a feminine boy." Johnson distinguishes this from transsexual, defining transsexuals as those who are on hormones and getting surgery. Also discussed are Johnson's experiences of the dangers of working as a street prostitute in drag, and the death of Johnson's partner. Johnson and Rivera's interviews and writings in this era also at times used terminology in ways that were sarcastic and camp, other times serious, or all of the above at once.

Johnson's style of drag was not serious ("high drag" or "show drag" ), due to being unable to afford to purchase clothing from expensive stores. She received leftover flowers after sleeping under tables used for sorting flowers in Manhattan's Flower District, and was known for wearing crowns of fresh flowers. Johnson was tall, slender and often dressed in flowing robes and shiny dresses, red plastic high heels and bright wigs, which tended to draw attention. As Edmund White wrote in his 1979 Village Voice article "The Politics of Drag", Johnson also liked dressing in ways that would display "the interstice between masculine and feminine". A feature photo of Johnson in this article shows Johnson in a flowing wig and makeup, and a translucent shirt, pants and parka – highlighting the ways that, quoting Kate Millett's Sexual Politics, Johnson is "both masculine and feminine at once — or male, but feminine."

There is some existing footage of Johnson doing full, glamorous, "high drag" on stage, but most of her performance work was with groups that were more grassroots, comedic and political. Johnson sang and performed as a member of J. Camicias' New York-based international drag performance troupe, Hot Peaches, from 1972 through to shows in the 1990s. When The Cockettes, a similar drag troupe from San Francisco, formed an East Coast troupe, The Angels of Light, Johnson was also asked to perform with them. In 1973, Johnson performed the role of "The Gypsy Queen" in the Angels' production, "The Enchanted Miracle", about the Comet Kohoutek. In 1975, Johnson was photographed by famed artist Andy Warhol, as part of a "Ladies and Gentlemen" series of Polaroids. In 1990, Johnson performed with Hot Peaches in London. Johnson, who was also HIV positive, became an AIDS activist and appeared in Hot Peaches production The Heat in 1990, singing the song "Love" while wearing an ACT UP, "Silence = Death" button.

While the photos of Johnson in dramatic, femme ensembles are the most well-known, there are also photos and film footage of Johnson dressed down in more daily wear of jeans and a flannel shirt and cap, or in shorts and a tank top, and no wig, such as at the Christopher Street Liberation March in 1979, or singing with the New York City Gay Men's Chorus at an AIDS memorial in the 1980s, or marching in a protest in Greenwich Village in 1992.

Though generally regarded as "generous and warmhearted" and "saintly" under the Marsha persona, Johnson's angry, violent side could sometimes emerge when she was depressed or under severe stress. Some felt that it was more common for this to happen under Johnson's "male persona as Malcolm". During those moments when Johnson's violent side emerged, according to acquaintance Robert Heide, she would be aggressive, short-tempered, speak in a deeper voice, and, as Malcolm, would "become a very nasty, vicious man, looking for fights". This dual personality has been described as "a schizophrenic personality at work". When this happened, Johnson would often get in fights and wind up hospitalized and sedated, and friends would have to organize and raise money to bail her out of jail or try to secure release from places like Bellevue Hospital. In the 1979 Village Voice article, and further elaborated upon by Stonewall historian Carter, it had perhaps been for this reason that other activists had been reluctant at first to credit Johnson for helping to spark the gay liberation movement of the early 1970s. Watson also reported that Johnson's saintly personality was "volatile", and listed a roster of gay bars from which she had been banned.

Stonewall uprising
Johnson was one of the first drag queens to go to the Stonewall Inn after the establishment began taking business from women and drag queens; it was previously a bar only for gay men. On the early morning hours of June 28, 1969, the Stonewall uprising occurred. While the first two nights of rioting were the most intense, the clashes with police would result in a series of spontaneous demonstrations and marches through the gay neighborhoods of Greenwich Village for roughly a week afterwards.

Johnson has been named, along with Zazu Nova and Jackie Hormona, by a number of the Stonewall veterans interviewed by David Carter in his book, Stonewall: The Riots That Sparked the Gay Revolution, as being "three individuals known to have been in the vanguard" of the pushback against the police at the uprising. However, Johnson denied starting the uprising. In 1987 she recalled arriving at around "2:00 [that morning]", that "the riots had already started" by that time and that the Stonewall building had already been set on fire by police. The riots reportedly started at around 1:20 a.m. after Stormé DeLarverie fought back against a police officer who attempted to arrest her that night.

According to Carter, Robin Souza reported that fellow Stonewall veterans such as Morty Manford and Marty Robinson had witnessed Johnson throw a shot glass at a mirror in the torched bar, screaming, "I got my civil rights!" Souza told the Gay Activists Alliance shortly afterwards that it "was the shot glass that was heard around the world". Carter, however, concluded that Robinson had given several different accounts of the uprising and in none of the accounts was Johnson's name brought up, possibly in fear that if he publicly credited the uprising to Johnson, then her well-known mental state and gender nonconforming, "could have been used effectively by the movement's opponents". The alleged "shot glass" incident has also been heavily disputed. Prior to Carter's book, it was claimed Johnson had "thrown a brick" at a police officer, an account that was never verified. Johnson also confirmed not being present at the Stonewall Inn when the rioting broke out, but instead had heard about it and went to get Rivera, who was at a park uptown sleeping on a bench, to inform her about it. However, many have corroborated that on the second night, Johnson climbed up a lamppost and dropped a bag with a brick in it onto a police car, shattering the windshield.

Other activism
Following the Stonewall uprising, Johnson joined the Gay Liberation Front (GLF) and was active in the GLF Drag Queen Caucus. On the first anniversary of the Stonewall uprising, on June 28, 1970, Johnson marched in the first Gay Pride rally, then called the Christopher Street Liberation Day. One of her most notable direct actions occurred in August 1970, staging a sit-in protest at Weinstein Hall at New York University alongside fellow GLF members after administrators canceled a dance when they found out that it was sponsored by gay organizations.

Shortly after, Johnson and Rivera co-founded the Street Transvestite Action Revolutionaries (initially titled Street Transvestites Actual Revolutionaries, or STAR). The two of them became a visible presence at gay liberation marches and other radical political actions. In 1973, Johnson and Rivera were banned from participating in the gay pride parade by the gay and lesbian committee who were administering the event, stating they "weren't gonna allow drag queens" at their marches claiming they were "giving them a bad name". Their response was to march defiantly ahead of the parade. During a gay rights rally at New York City Hall in the early '70s, photographed by Diana Davies, a reporter asked Johnson why the group was demonstrating, Johnson shouted into the microphone, "Darling, I want my gay rights now!"

During another incident around this time, Johnson was confronted by police officers for hustling in New York. When the officers attempted to perform an arrest, Johnson hit them with a handbag which contained two bricks. When asked by the judge for an explanation for hustling, Johnson claimed to be trying to secure enough money for a tombstone for her husband. During a time when same-sex marriage was illegal in the United States, the judge asked what "happened to this alleged husband", Johnson responded, "Pig shot him". Initially sentenced to ninety days in prison for the assault, Johnson's lawyer eventually convinced the judge that Bellevue Hospital would be more suitable.

STAR House
In 1970, Johnson and Rivera established STAR House, a shelter for homeless gay and trans youth, and paid the rent for it with money they made themselves as sex workers. While the House was not focused on performance, Johnson was a "drag mother" of STAR House, in the longstanding tradition of "Houses" as chosen family in the Black and Latino LGBT community. Johnson worked to provide food, clothing, emotional support and a sense of family for the young drag queens, trans women, gender nonconformists and other gay street kids living on the Christopher Street docks or in Johnson's house on the Lower East Side. While the original location of STAR House was evicted in 1971 and the building was destroyed, the household existed in different configurations and at different locations over the years.

Later life
By 1966, Johnson lived on the streets and engaged in survival sex. In connection with sex work, she claimed to have been arrested over 100 times, and was also shot once, in the late 1970s. Johnson spoke of first having a mental breakdown in 1970. According to Bob Kohler, Johnson would walk naked up Christopher Street and be taken away for two or three months to be treated with chlorpromazine, an antipsychotic medication. Upon returning, the medication would wear off over the course of one month and Johnson would then return to normal.

Between 1980 and Johnson's death in 1992, she lived with a friend, Randy Wicker, who had invited Johnson to stay the night one time when it was "very cold out—about 10 degrees [Fahrenheit]" (10 F), and Johnson had just never left. When Wicker's lover, David, became terminally ill with AIDS, Johnson became his caregiver. After visiting David and other friends with the virus in the hospital during the AIDS pandemic, Johnson, who was also HIV-positive, became committed to sitting with the sick and dying, as well as doing street activism with AIDS activist groups including ACT UP.

In David France's documentary, The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson, Johnson is seen participating in a 1980s memorial service and action for those who had died of AIDS, along with members of the Gay Men's Health Crisis. In 1992, New York became gripped by a gay bashing epidemic with 1,300 reports, 18% of which was allegedly perpetrated by police. Marches were organized in response, and Johnson was one of the activists who marched in the streets, demanding justice. Only weeks later, Johnson would also be found dead, having sustained a severe head injury.

In 1992, George Segal's sculpture, Gay Liberation was moved to Christopher Park as part of the new Gay Liberation Monument. Johnson commented, "How many people have died for these two little statues to be put in the park to recognize gay people? How many years does it take for people to see that we're all brothers and sisters and human beings in the human race? I mean how many years does it take for people to see that we're all in this rat race together."

Johnson remained devoutly religious in later life, often lighting candles and praying at St. Mary's Catholic Church in Hoboken, saying in 1992: "I practice the Catholic religion because the Catholic religion is part of the Santería of the saints, which says that we are all brothers and sisters in Christ." Johnson would also make offerings to the saints and spirits in a more personal manner, keeping a private altar at home when possible. As friend James Gallagher related in the documentary Pay it No Mind, "Marsha would always say she went to the Greek Church, she went to the Catholic Church, she went to the Baptist Church, she went to the Jewish Temple - she said she was covering all angles." In the summer of 1991, Johnson participated in the interfaith AIDS memorial service at the Church of Saint Veronica in Greenwich Village. When asked about religion in the last interview, Johnson said, "I use Jesus Christ the most in my prayers, most of the time." A neighbor also said Johnson would pray, prostrate on the floor in front of the statue of the Virgin Mary, in the church across from Wicker's apartment (where Johnson lived in later years). Johnson's friend Sasha McCaffrey added, "I would find her in the strangest churches. She'd be wearing velvet and throwing glitter."

Johnson expressed a relationship with the Divine that was direct and personal, saying in her last interview (June 1992), about leaving home in 1963, "I got the Lord on my side, and I took him to my heart with me and I came to the city, for better or worse. And he said, 'You know, you might wind up with nothing.' 'Cause you know, me and Jesus is always talking. And I said, Honey, I don't care if I never have nothing ever till the day I die. All I want is my freedom." "I believe [Jesus is] the only man I can truly trust. He's like the spirit that follows me around, you know, and helps me out in my hour of need."

In Pay it No Mind, friends Bob Kohler and Agosto Machado talk about Johnson's relationship with Neptune. Kohler tells a story of sunbathing at the Christopher Street piers when Johnson, naked, began grabbing at Kohler's shirt, shouting, "My father needs those clothes!" Johnson succeeded in pulling Kohler's shirt off and throwing it into the Hudson River. "These were sacrifices to her father, and to Neptune, who got all mixed up together," explains Kohler. Machado continues, "She was making offerings of flowers and change to King Neptune as an appeasement to help her friends who are on the other side."

Near the time of Johnson's death in 1992, Wicker said Johnson was increasingly sick and in a fragile state. However, none of Johnson's friends or relatives believed Johnson was suicidal.

Death
Shortly after the 1992 gay pride parade, Johnson's body was discovered floating in the Hudson River. Police initially ruled the death a suicide, but Johnson's friends and other members of the local community insisted she was not suicidal and noted that the back of her head had a massive wound.

Johnson's death occurred during a time when anti-LGBT violence was at a peak in New York City, including bias crime by police. Johnson was one of the activists who had been drawing attention to the issue, participating in marches and other activism to demand justice for victims, and an inquiry into how to stop the violence. She had been speaking out against the "dirty cops" and elements of organized crime that many believed responsible for some of these assaults and murders, and had even voiced the concern that some of what Wicker was stirring up, and pulling Johnson into, "could get you murdered." This added to the suspicions of foul play and possible murder.

Johnson's body was cremated and, following a funeral at a local church and a march down Seventh Avenue, friends released her ashes over the Hudson River, off the Christopher Street piers. Police allowed Seventh Avenue to be closed while Johnson's ashes were carried to the river. After the funeral, a series of demonstrations and marches to the police precinct took place, to demand justice for Johnson.

Postmortem developments
According to Rivera, Kohler believed Johnson committed suicide due to an ever-increasing fragile state, which Rivera herself disputed, claiming she and Johnson had "made a pact" to "cross the 'River Jordan' together". Those who were close to Johnson considered the death suspicious; many claimed that while Johnson did struggle mentally, this did not manifest itself as suicidal ideation. Wicker later said that Johnson may have hallucinated and walked into the river, or may have jumped into the river to escape harassers, but stated that Johnson was never suicidal.

Several people came forward to say they had seen Johnson harassed by a group of "thugs" who had also robbed people. According to Wicker, a witness saw a neighborhood resident fighting with Johnson on July 4. During the fight he used a homophobic slur, and later bragged to someone at a bar that he had killed a drag queen named Marsha. The witness said that when he tried to tell police what he had seen, his story was ignored. Other locals stated later that law enforcement was not interested in investigating Johnson's death, stating that the case was about a "gay black man" and wanting little to do with it at the time.

In December 2002, a police investigation resulted in reclassification of Johnson's cause of death from "suicide" to "undetermined". Former New York politician Thomas Duane fought to reopen the case because, "Usually when there is a death by suicide the person usually leaves a note. She didn't leave a note." In November 2012, activist Mariah Lopez succeeded in getting the police to reopen the case as a possible homicide.

In 2016, Victoria Cruz of the Anti-Violence Project also tried to get Johnson's case reopened and succeeded in gaining access to previously unreleased documents and witness statements. She sought out new interviews with witnesses, friends, other activists and police who had worked the case or had been on the force at the time of Johnson's death. Some of her work to find justice for Johnson was filmed by David France for the 2017 documentary The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson.

Tributes

 * The 2012 documentary Pay It No Mind – The Life and Times of Marsha P. Johnson heavily features segments from a 1992 interview with Johnson, which was filmed shortly before Johnson's death. Many friends of Johnson's from Greenwich Village are interviewed for the documentary.
 * Johnson appears as a character in two fictional film dramas that are based on real events, including Stonewall (2015), played by Otoja Abit, and Happy Birthday, Marsha! (2016), played by Mya Taylor. Both movies are creative interpretations, inspired by the Stonewall uprising.
 * The 2017 documentary, The Death and Life of Marsha P. Johnson, follows trans woman Victoria Cruz of the Anti-Violence Project as she investigates Johnson's death. Like Pay It No Mind, it relies on archival footage and interviews.
 * New York City artist Anohni produced multiple tributes to Johnson, including baroque pop band Anohni and the Johnsons (named in Johnson's honor), and the 1995 play The Ascension of Marsha P. Johnson. Their 2023 album My Back Was a Bridge For You to Cross depicts Johnson on the album's artwork.
 * American drag queen and TV personality RuPaul has called Johnson an inspiration, describing Johnson as "the true Drag Mother". During an episode of his show RuPaul's Drag Race in 2012, RuPaul told her contestants that Johnson "paved the way for all of [them]".
 * In 2018 the New York Times published a belated obituary for Johnson.
 * A large, painted mural depicting Johnson and Sylvia Rivera went on display in Dallas, Texas, in 2019 to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. The painting of the "two pioneers of the gay rights movement" in front of a transgender flag claims to be the world's largest mural honoring the trans community.
 * On May 30, 2019, it was announced that Johnson and Sylvia Rivera would be honored with monuments at Greenwich Village, near the site of the Stonewall club. Construction is rumored to be completed by 2021. These monuments of Johnson and Rivera will be the world's first to honor transgender activists.
 * On May 31, 2019, queer street artists Homo Riot and Suriani created a mural, as part of the WorldPride Mural Project and Stonewall 50 – WorldPride NYC 2019, and dedicated to Queer Liberation, featuring multiple images of Johnson. The mural, located at 2nd Avenue and Houston Street in New York City, was curated by photographer and filmmaker Daniel "Dusty" Albanese.
 * In June 2019, Johnson was one of the inaugural fifty American "pioneers, trailblazers, and heroes" inducted on the National LGBTQ Wall of Honor within the Stonewall National Monument (SNM) in New York City's Stonewall Inn. The SNM is the first U.S. national monument dedicated to LGBTQ rights and history, and the wall's unveiling was timed to take place during the 50th anniversary of the Stonewall riots.
 * On June 30, 2020, Google celebrated Marsha P. Johnson with a Google Doodle.
 * In August 2020 the Union County, New Jersey Office of LGBTQ Affairs announced Johnson's hometown, Elizabeth, New Jersey, would erect a monument to Johnson. A petition to remove the Christopher Columbus monument and replace it with a statue of Johnson received over 75,000 signatures. A mural of Johnson, also in Elizabeth, was vandalized during Pride Month in June 2021. Community organizers vowed to fund restoration of the mural to honor Pride Month and Johnson's legacy.
 * On August 24, 2020, the 75th anniversary of Johnson's birth, the Marsha P. Johnson State Park was renamed in Johnson's honor, becoming the first New York state park named after an openly LGBT person. Two years later, governor Kathy Hochul announced that a new gate to the park would be constructed in Johnson's honor.

title: Marsha P. Johnson


text:
Paul Shortino

Paul Shortino (born May 14, 1953) is an American rock singer and musician who has sung for Rough Cutt/The Cutt, Quiet Riot, Bad Boyz, and Shortino. He briefly recorded with J.K. Northrup as the duo, Shortino/Northrup. He has also recorded as a solo artist, writing and performing the song "E.G.G.M.A.N." as the theme for Dr. Eggman in Sonic Adventure 2 for Sega, and in Shadow the Hedgehog as "E.G.G.M.A.N. Doc Robeatnix Mix". Shortino recorded lead vocals for the Heavy Metal benefit project Hear 'n Aid in 1985. The single from this project, "Stars", also features lead vocals by heavy metal singers Ronnie James Dio, Rob Halford, Geoff Tate, Don Dokken, Kevin DuBrow, Eric Bloom and Dave Meniketti.

Shortino is currently a member of the band King Kobra, and also performs in the cast of Raiding the Rock Vault at the Hard Rock Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas.

Acting
Shortino played the character "Duke Fame" in the film, This Is Spinal Tap, and reprised this role in the first webisode by Las Vegas-based group Sin City Sinners. He resides in Las Vegas with his wife Carmen, and is a regular guest of the Sinners.

With Rough Cutt

 * "Used And Abused" and "A Little Kindness" (1981)
 * Rough Cutt (1985)
 * Wants You! (1986)
 * Rough Cutt Live (1996)
 * Sneak Peek EP (2000)
 * Anthology (2008)
 * Rough Cutt 3 (2021)

With The Cutt

 * Sacred Place (2002)

With Quiet Riot

 * QR (1988)

With Badd Boyz

 * Badd Boyz (1993)

With Shortino

 * It's About Time (1997)
 * Booked, Toured, ...Released! (1999)
 * Chasing My Dream (2009)
 * Make A Wish (2020)

With Shortino/Northrup

 * Back on Track (1993)
 * Afterlife (2004)

Paul Shortino & the Rhythm Junkies

 * Stand or Fall (1999)

Hear 'n Aid

 * Hear 'n Aid - "Stars" (1986)

With King Kobra

 * King Kobra (2011)
 * King Kobra II (2013)
 * We Are Warriors (2023)

With Michael Cosyn Group

 * Burn The Earth (2015)

With Appice

 * Sinister (2017)

title: Paul Shortino


text:
Return to the Batcave: The Misadventures of Adam and Burt

Return to the Batcave: The Misadventures of Adam and Burt is a 2003 American made-for-television biographical action-comedy film based on the 1966–1968 Batman television series which features the original stars Adam West and Burt Ward as themselves, with Jack Brewer and Jason Marsden portraying the young West (Batman) and Ward (Robin) in flashbacks. It was broadcast on CBS on March 9, 2003.

Plot
Adam West prepares to attend a gala-style charity event targeted towards orphans, featuring a variety of classic cars, including the original Batmobile from Batman. Adam's butler, Jerry (whom Adam refers to as "Alfred"), arranges the event and reunites Adam with his former co-star, Burt Ward.

While at the gala, Adam reveals to Burt that he had kept the key to the original Batmobile from during the show's original run. As he showcases the key, the lights mysteriously go out, and when they turn back on, both Adam's key and the Batmobile itself are gone. Outside, a valet informs them that the thief had been asking for directions to "the highway to Arizona". Though Burt is reluctant to follow the perpetrators, Adam manages to coerce him into going on a road-trip in pursuit of the Batmobile.

Prompted by a riddle left at the gala, Adam and Burt reminisce along they way about their life before the show. Burt recalls a time in which he was homeless, living under the Miami pier and collecting bottles for a living, before he managed to catch his big break after a successful audition as Robin. Adam, on the other hand, remembers how he had to compete against Lyle Waggoner for the role of Batman, only narrowly acquiring the part after the studio executives agreed he had a better jawline.

At the Arizona border, Adam and Burt come to realize there is a bar located scant blocks away from the site of the charity event named "The Highway to Arizona," and retrace their route. At the bar, as Burt steps away to urinate, Adam finds himself momentarily seduced by a mysterious woman who reminds him of "someone I can't quite put my finger on," only for her to vanish moments later. After Burt returns, Adam hears their suspect running out of the bar. They attempt to follow but are confronted by a group of apparent henchmen, and a brawl ensues. Their attackers defeated, the duo leave the bar to find their car being towed. Instead of a parking ticket, however, they are given a movie ticket to a screening of Batman: The Movie.

Adam and Burt notice during the film that all footage of Batman and Robin have been cut, instead featuring only the villains. During the screening, Burt recalls an incident in which television censors began to criticize the tightness of his Robin briefs, forcing him to take temporary shrinkage pills (implied to be hormone therapy) to decrease his genital size during shooting. At the same time, Adam deals with the painful memories of his divorce and ostracization from his children.

After the screening, the duo follow an oil slick to a nearby diner, but find no leads. After Burt and Adam recall a temporary on-set rivalry between them, a crazed fan who nearly killed Burt after a one-night stand, and a ridiculous outburst from method actor Vincent Price during his time as Egghead, a Batman fan that Adam had signed the breasts of years earlier (with a permanent marker that, fittingly, never washed off) arrives to tell them the location of the Batmobile.

Upon arrival to the Batmobile, the duo enter, but find it booby-trapped. Sedated and piloted remotely to the original Batcave set, Jerry reveals himself to be the thief and, in an odd turn of events, pulls off his mask to reveal himself to be Frank Gorshin, the actor who played the Riddler. Frank restrains Adam and Burt and reveals that, years earlier, he had stolen the set blueprints of the Batman series in his plan for revenge against the hero actors getting more recognition than those who played the villains. Adam realizes the woman from earlier was none other than Julie Newmar, who then reveals herself to be working as Frank's accomplice.

Strapped to an armed bomb, Adam tricks Frank into ejecting himself from the Batmobile and onto a ledge, before cutting his and Burt's restraints off with a prop Batarang he was gifted years earlier. Now free, the duo escape the cave just before it detonates (although Burt does suffer some burns), before calling the police to arrest Frank Gorshin and Julie Newmar.

Days later, Burt and Adam attend the re-opening of the classic car event for orphans. The lights vanish once more and the Batmobile is gone. Adam rushes off to find the perpetrators whilst accompanied by the classic Batman theme, with a more enthusiastic Burt running by his side.

Casting
Apart from West and Ward, a number of actors from the original series also appeared in the film. This includes Frank Gorshin, who played the Riddler, Julie Newmar, who played Catwoman for the first two seasons of the show and Lee Meriwether, who played Catwoman in the Batman theatrical film. Gorshin and Newmar appear as themselves, while Meriwether appears as a waitress.

Due to licensing problems involving the original TV series, the makers of this film were only allowed to use footage from the 1966 Batman feature film. As a result, Lee Meriwether's rendition of Catwoman is the only one seen in archive footage in this film (even during a musical sequence intended to pay tribute to Newmar). Zambia-born actress Julia Rose plays the young Julie Newmar and is seen briefly in the Catwoman costume.

Jason Marsden, who plays the young Burt Ward/Robin, has done a few voice roles in DC/Warner Bros Cartoons such as Batman Beyond, Justice League Unlimited, and Young Justice.

Lyle Waggoner, who originally auditioned for the part of Batman, and Betty White both have cameos in the movie. Some of Waggoner's actual audition tape footage can be seen in the film. Waggoner ended up landing a role in another DC Comics' TV series: he played Steve Trevor on Wonder Woman in the 1970s alongside Lynda Carter as the title character. Adam West's daughter, Nina West, also has a cameo as a psychotic actress who tries to kill Burt Ward after a one-night stand. This incident is mentioned in Ward's autobiography, My Life in Tights. During the original series, of the four main supervillains (Joker, Riddler, Penguin, and Catwoman), only Riddler never entered the Batcave set; in the movie the Riddler finally does enter the Batcave.

Cast

 * Adam West as himself
 * Burt Ward as himself
 * Jack Brewer as Adam West / Batman
 * Jason Marsden as Burt Ward / Robin
 * Lyle Waggoner as himself / narrator
 * Frank Gorshin as himself
 * Julie Newmar as herself / Arizona Bar Owner
 * Lee Meriwether as Waitress in Diner
 * Betty White as Woman in Window during Batclimb Sequence
 * Amy Acker as Bonnie Lindsey
 * Brett Rickaby as Frank Gorshin / Riddler
 * Curtis Armstrong as Jerry the Butler
 * Jim Jansen as William Dozier
 * Stacy Kamano as Nghara Frisbie-West
 * Ray Buktenica as Robert Butler
 * Steve Vinovich as Bartender (was a bad guy)
 * Andy Umberger as Sam Strangis (assistant director)
 * Joel Swetow as Casting Director
 * Nina West as Burt's One Night Stand
 * Darla Haun as Charity Event Host
 * Julia Rose as Julie Newmar / Catwoman
 * Erin Carufel as Yvonne Craig / Batgirl
 * Nikki Ziering as Lucy
 * Quinn K. Redeker as Vincent Price / Egghead
 * Tony Tanner as Burgess Meredith / Penguin
 * Bud Watson as Cesar Romero / Joker
 * Christopher Darga as Adam West's Agent Lou
 * Ivar Brogger as Doctor
 * Silas Cooper as Wardrobe Man
 * Todd Merrill as Network Executive
 * John E. Goetz as Valet parker
 * Elisa Marchhand as Fem fatale
 * Rory Thost as Hunter
 * Talt Ruppert as Publicist
 * Ben Perkins as Fan boy
 * Kelli King as Joneli
 * Heidi Androl as Sexy fan
 * Traci L. Crouch as Secretary
 * Frank Addela as Robin stuntman
 * Steve Bialock as Batman stuntman
 * Bobby Porter as Henchman – Big Joe
 * Scott L. Schwartz as Henchman – Curly
 * Carl Ciarfalio as Henchman – Slim
 * Anthony G. Schmidt as Henchman – Pretty Boy
 * Brian Shakti as Delivery boy
 * Zack Milan as Mysterious Stranger (uncredited)
 * Chris Dawson as Reporter (uncredited)
 * Bryan Hanna as Director / Cameraman (uncredited)
 * Paul A. Kaufman as Network Executive #2 (uncredited)
 * Cesar Romero as The Joker (uncredited / archive footage from the 1966 film)
 * Burgess Meredith as Penguin (uncredited / archive footage from the 1966 film)

Home media
Return to the Batcave was released on DVD on May 17, 2005, by Anchor Bay Entertainment.