text:
User talk:Guettarda/Archive5

BC/AD
I'd like to explore your argument that BC/AD is POV here in user space where there's not as much noise. I disagree with your claim, but I'm interested in a rational debate about it, and maybe you can convince me (or I can convince you). At the very least, we can come up with things for you and/or me to muse over. Let me know if you're not interested in discussing this here, but if you are, feel free to respond either here or on my talk page, whichever suits you best.

You continue to state unequivocally that BC/AD asserts the deity of Jesus, yet faced with the parallel problem in Thursday, you say that Thursday is not a problem because few, if any, people worship Thor. It seems to me that you're effectively suggesting that BC/AD would be sufficiently NPOV if very few people believed in Jesus. Is that a reasonable conclusion to draw from your argument? Alanyst 06:34, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I think the dilution argument is precisely where I'm coming from. I don't think anyone seriously argues that "Before Christ" and "Anno Domini" express no POV, but since the initialisms "BC" and "AD" have been used so extensively in so many contexts without reference to their expansions, they no longer mean what they originally stood for. In essence, they have become new words: "beesee" and "ehdee". Their modern meaning is nothing more than "before the start of the current era" and "after the start of the current era"—not what the letters stand for, to be sure, but what they now mean.

It is difficult to provide evidence for (or against!) my argument that the meaning of BC/AD has changed enough to dilute the original POV such that BC/AD is acceptable for Wikipedia's NPOV policy. I guess I would cite as evidence the fact that BC/AD is so widely used that, statistically speaking, among those who comfortably use the term are probably millions of people who do not espouse a Christian POV. So your conclusion as a child that "non-Christians can't use that term" was naïve (no offense intended) because you did not recognize that the original meaning, which you had just learned, could be diluted by time and by the diversity of those who use it—in other words, you thought the original meaning was necessarily the current meaning, which is a very forgivable yet mistaken conclusion for a ten-year-old to draw. Since many non-Christians comfortably use the term in an identical manner to how Christians use the term, one cannot tell whether a particular usage of BC/AD is, by itself, expressing a Christian POV or not; the context in which it is used must be known to gauge whether it lends to a POV or not. (On the other hand, if I saw someone write "500 years before Christ" or "Anno Domini 300" then I could more readily conclude that a Christian POV is being expressed, since non-Christians are much less likely to express dates in this manner, and the trouble taken to go beyond the common abbreviations is indicative that the author is trying to make a rhetorical point beyond the mere expression of the date.) So, writing "500 BC" in Wikipedia cannot reasonably convey an endorsement of the Christian POV by itself or in an otherwise neutral context. But in contexts where use of BC/AD would be unusual, its appearance would in fact be indicative of POV. Does this make sense, or do you see problems with this argument? Alanyst 15:44, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You said: ''As I see it, POV or NPOV is not a function of the intention of the writer, but in the possible interpretations of the readers...What the writer meant to say is irrelevant. What the writer said is all that matters...Majoritarian POV (like BC/AD) would only work if we circumscribe our audience.''

I'm somewhat persuaded by this reasoning, although I'm not entirely satisfied. Let's suppose for the sake of argument that the author's intentions don't matter; only the readers' interpretations are of concern. Under that assumption, consider the problem of "Thursday". (I don't mean to keep harping on this example but I haven't really been satisfied with past attempts at refuting it.) Almost nobody considers that "Thursday" is POV—but, if the Thursday article is to be believed, some Quakers do in fact eschew the term because they feel it communicates a pagan POV. Let's compare the possible interpretations of BC/AD and Thursday: Now, under what principle do we allow "Thursday" in Wikipedia, despite knowing that a Quaker might find an unacceptable POV in that term, but ban "BC" and "AD" from Wikipedia because some people find an unacceptable POV in those terms? In other words, what are the criteria for establishing that a particular term carries an unacceptable POV? Because the mere fact that someone can find an offensive POV in a particular term doesn't seem to be sufficient. Does it matter how many people may or may not subscribe to a particular interpretation? Alanyst 15:43, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * BC/AD interpretations
 * Original meaning unknown; "BC" and "AD" are simply letters that tell us the era.
 * Original meaning known but most modern uses of "BC" and "AD" do not convey that meaning.
 * Original meaning known and most modern uses of "BC" and "AD" convey that meaning.
 * Thursday interpretations
 * Original meaning unknown; "Thursday" is simply the name of a day of the week.
 * Original meaning known but most modern uses of "Thursday" do not convey that meaning.
 * Original meaning known and most modern uses of "Thursday" convey that meaning.

SEPP
For information about participants in SEPP, you might try asking SEPP. There is an infrequently updated list of participants. The Virginia State Corporation Commission Clerk lists several officers/directors: CORPORATE ID: 	0400828		              CURRENT AR# 204-69-1330 DATE 09/24/04 CORP NAME: 	SCIENCE & ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY PROJECT, THE STREET: 1600 S EADS ST                STE 712 S         CITY:  ARLINTON                 STATE:  VA  ZIP:  22202 S C                                               DIR REQUIRED: N  E  A             OFFICERS/DIRECTORS DISPLAY FOR AR#  204-69-1330 L T              NAME                                   TITLE         SIGN B  S F SINGER                                       PRESIDENT D  MARK BRANDSDORFER                                DIRECTOR D  CHARLES GELMAN                                   DIRECTOR D  FREDRICK SEITZ                                   DIRECTOR

(SEWilco 08:11, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))

Sorry to hear about this
I'm sorry to hear about your disillusionment with Wikipedia. I think you are a valuable contributor, I would rather have you around. On the other hand, it isn't important enough in the grand scheme of things that is should cost you that much stress. Wish you all the best, whatever path you take. Guettarda 16:59, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I dont enjoy leaving wikipedia but users keep harrasing me. Their edits concentrate on reverting my edits only. No one so far have taken the mesures to stop this.
 * When I give govermental data thats pov because "governments have been known to lie" some sane looking reverts dont quite have a basis. They are an expert on any and every issue I write.
 * If they could make Star Trek POV they would. Which is the only thing they havent interfered.
 * Even for articles I wrote such as Ranks and insignia of NATO Armies was bad . I was "abusing" templates. I can go on forever.
 * In sum its pointless for me to edit wikipedia. They find ways to bother me. They are obsessed with my edits. Their lack of edits rather than reverts is the living proof of this. Two users work together and get involved in revert wars in almost any article I edit. They have 6 reverts while I have 3. There always is a concensus against me by the same users on almost any article I touch. --Cool Cat My Talk 21:31, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's terrible. You seem like a dedicated editor and decent person; why are these users targeting you? I hate to see people leave this great project just because some jerks are ganging up. If you would like me to mediate or something, I'd be happy to. Bratsche talk  5 pillars 21:41, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * I am not really sure. My theory is: my "futile" attempt to NPOVise Armenian Genocide. I requested sources so that my counterpart prooves genocide etc... I asked him to use sources that are not specilised with the event only. You know standard stuff... It wasnt a very pleasant discussion overall. Their edits are on average minor things, which is fine, aside form that they revert me, the less I edit the less I get reverted obvliously. They keep reverting untill I "give up" no discussing in talk at all. Meanwhile I write entier articles. I dont know what you can do to stop their obsession with me. I dont want regular users in the crosfire as they may do what they do to me to you as well. Admins on the other hand can handle any harrasment like I recieved better. They wont intimidate me with their harrasment. But its rather pointless me to write anything as everything I write is pov, regardless of its contents quite frequently. Its just one revert war after another. --Cool Cat My Talk 22:08, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lakes in TT
OK, so I'll remove Pitch Lake from this category, but I'll leave the category for future. Really no natural lakes on Trinidad and Tobago? - Darwinek 14:50, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
I nominated you for an admin. Just go to accept nomination and answer few questions. I like you, so I wish you good luck! - Darwinek 15:58, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

edit summaries
Well, I was mainly talking about edits like this. For your own user space, as well as new articles, I guess it doesn't matter much. For talk pages, it may help some watchlisting people if you were to say 'respond to ' or something like that. But if you're willing to promise that, I'd be happy to support. Yours, Radiant_ >|< 12:45, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Bhojpuri
I don't know Bhojpuri. I've heard it a few times and all I can say is that a few words are different, but not very difficult to understand from Hindi. I'd just created a stub as there was a red link. Regards, =Nichalp (Talk)= 10:31, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

 * If it means something else, then I really don't know. I'm sorry. You could ask around in Wikipedia Talk:Notice board for India-related topics. Not many watch that page though. =Nichalp (Talk)= 14:59, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, I don't know the word. =Nichalp (Talk)= 15:04, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support
Hi Guettarda! Thanks for supporting my adminship nomination! Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:09, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My Rfa
Thank you for supporting me! --Kbdank71 13:20, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re:Category:American dependencies
Hi, there Guettarda. In regards to the "American Dependencies" Catagory for Anguilla I thought it was honestly a mistake? Did you happen to have something in mind with Anguilla? As far as I knew, it was apart of St. Kitts/Nevis/Anguilla (Now just St. Kitts & Nevis). Then, they had voted to rejoin the UK. Were you accidentally thinking US dependency? but meant UK? Let me know if otherwise. You may know something about Ai. that I have no idea about. CaribDigita 18:45, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh- I see now, yes-yes-yes good point! I mis-took that completely. I thought it was "American Dependency" as-in "U.S.V.I, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa", etc.  As far as a renaming, I'm wondering if you perhaps had anything in mind??? The only thing I could think of is rather long. "Dependencies (of/in) the Americas" too long??
 * P.S. I wish I knew you were up for adminship status before, I fully support that switch. **Small joke- I think you're going to reach there long before Mannings' vision 2020. :-) Hope you're having a great day. CaribDigita 19:08, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi, I just got your message. About your suggestion, I must say I do like what you've come up with, on the Cat-renaming Esp. the one "Category:Dependent territories in the Americas". I think that one is quite fitting, but honestly both of your ideas are great... Which one do you like better?  I'd back the idea of namechange on either of these names....  CaribDigita 15:55, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I definantly back the change. Let me know, I'm still learning the art of the "diplomacy's" on here. hence why I didn't change anything myself. :-) Actually while I still have something fresh in my head. From what you've seen has any wikipedia areas made any decisions on wheather "country infoboxes" are a good or bad thing to have on country pages? CaribDigita 16:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for intiating the 'Categ' name change processs. I did make sure I backed your proposal on the shift to a new title.

About- the "infoboxes" I was refering to, that would be the "Countryboxes". Sorry to run these together in the same section of your talk page. I Just wanted to ask this quickly while I did have an instance of your attention. Thanks on this as well, your answer did answer my question. I'd been updating a few of the country profiles and realised that many (in the Carib'n) had the "Countryboxes" cropped from it's own separate template and pasted 'within the country' profile. I just wanted to ask and make sure I wasn't doing anything 'bad' by firstly: by relaying any new information onto these templates as well, and then secondly: refering the articles back to getting their country info from the "Countryboxes" --with-- an easy "Edit this template" link also included and visable on the Countryboxes. Thanks again, as always you remain an asset to the wikipedia community. CaribDigita 10:17, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Caribbean stubs
Please feel welcome to add to my list at User:ScottDavis/Caribbean. You look much more qualified to look for them than I feel. I interpret you feel it's a useful stub category that's currently missing? --ScottDavis 00:52, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It's interesting that in the caribbean, I'm finding lots of bio-stubs. At the same time looking to populate Oceania-stub, I'm finding lots of music, culture but not so many people. Thanks for the help. Incidentally, some of my contributions overlap yours at the moment - I've been trying to populate all the Governors of South Australia, and many early governors also served in the Caribbean countries and Canada. --ScottDavis 02:55, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thankyou for your help. I've created Caribbean-stub and Category:Caribbean stubs and populated them from the list. --ScottDavis 12:39, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * A quick glance shows about 60 bio-stubs and 65 non-bio. I guess that makes it just qualify for the lower bound of splitting off a separate stub category. I'd be inclined to leave it for now, and see how the category stabilises. However, I'm not a stubs expert. (I made just over 200 edits in just over 2 hours populating Oceania and Caribbean stubs) --ScottDavis 13:15, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adminship JoJan
I thank you for supporting my nomination. Another two days, and you'll most probably will be an administrator yourself. Good luck ! JoJan 15:08, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sn0wflake
You added Snowflakes' nom within JoJan's. I have moved it to the proper place.
 * Oops - thanks. You're proving your worth as an admin already ;) Grutness...  wha?  01:08, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks
Thank you for your support for my adminship. PS, it looks like the entry for "category:Presidents of Trinidad and Tobago" on your user page might be "live". Either that, or we should refer to you as "your excellency." Cheers, -Willmcw 21:38, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Adminship support
Thanks! - I'll let you know later - MPF 23:17, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
My pleasure; I just hope that you don't come to resent those who helped push that bloody mop into your hand... Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 23:41, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! Enjoy your new mopping powers and don't let 'em overwork or stress you too much :-) -Vsmith 23:50, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Congrats from me too. It was my pleasure. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:09, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Congrats! BTW - I take it you are mainly responsible for the fact that there are more geography stubs from Trinidad and Tobago than any other Caribbean country? :) Grutness...  wha?  00:12, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Well done! And I pop "Calypso Breakaway" (Rounder) into the CD player as an aural salute to you. -- Hoary 05:28, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)

 * Congrats for a well-deserved successful adminship! :) -- M P er el ( talk 06:05, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * A deserved promotion, as reflected by the comments on the RFA page. violet/riga (t) 13:52, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your User page
Hey there, Guettarda. I just thought you might want to know that your User page is broken on 800x600 displays. The table containing the flags is overlapping the text and rendering it unreadable. Might I suggest that you adapted the table to the div HTML element, which overall is easier to manage? Or you could simply place it below the image to fix the layout. Also, congrats on the succesful RfA. Best regards. --Sn0wflake 00:28, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Your RfA
No worries - Good luck and happy editing! --Silversmith Hewwo 00:44, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 04:15, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :-)
I appreciate the kind words on my RFA! - Ta bu shi da yu 05:08, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

FAC
I have changed my vote to support for Democratic Labour Party (Trinidad and Tobago)'s FAC. In-line cites are not necessary to become a FAC, though they would be nice. This article, though, is fine without them now with more refs and more comprehensiveness. Keep up your excellent work! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 21:33, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

P.S. I can't miss this chance for promo! :) Mind Benders (which I am the maintainer of) has now opened pre-round one, a creative artistic competition. ALso, round one, which will be a competition consisting of ten or more creative, logical, and rhetorical questions, will open soon! So why not check it out and have some Wikifun! Hope to see you there!

table of contents

 * Thank you for your opinion about table of contents . Now could you point me to the wikipedia policy so that I can read it for myself?--CltFn 03:47, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

List of snakes of Trinidad and Tobago
Looks pretty good to me, although I know nothing about snakes - only saw one Tigre and several tree boas (the latter all at Caroni. I've fixed a typo, and make a couple of other minor changes. It would look better if the tables were all the same width, but I don't know if this is possible. Would it be more user-friendly to put English family names as well, where they exist, eg coral snakes, boas?

Hope this helps, jimfbleak 16:48, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Howard Wolpe
The Congressional biography says Wolpe lives in Lansing.

Thanks...
...but how did you know I wanted to make a subpage? --Wack'd About Wiki 18:13, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay
Go ask Usther your question. My talk board isn't the place to do it, his is. --Wack'd About Wiki 19:53, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know. What I ment by the message above was that I didn't want you to ask your question to Uster on my page. I misunderstood. --Wack'd About Wiki 21:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! --Wack'd About Wiki 21:18, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not an admin
Yeah, just lazy, I guess. Also I haven't been seriously editing any articles for quite a while now. I'm more of a "contributing editor" than a "managing editor" these days. Graft 05:17, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Evolution
We're being trolled again. I'm beginning to think that it may be better to simply not respond to the comments on talk, and only address any changes made to the article proper. It is at least apparent that the intent is not to further discussion but to stir up controversy. siafu 23:08, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You may be right, but whether it's intentional or not, it has certainly made me very frustrated in the past. Hopefully we all can better expend our energy elsewhere. siafu 23:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oops?
Er, what? Radiant_ >|< 14:45, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Re: your thanks
Sorry for the delay...i am still very new to editing and communicating on wikipedia. as a result i have only just viewed your two messages to me. Firstly, your are most welcomed. My support for your candidacy seemed appropriate. Secondly, I am Trinidadian. I was born there and moved to NYC when I was about 12. I have never been back since but cherish all my memories even though through a child's eye.

I came to Wikipedia looking for guidance on the usage of the term "West Indies". A friend of mine along with the support of his "learned friend" (an elementary school teacher) conspired to challenge my definition of "West Indies" which to a large degree, I understand to be nations formerly governed by the British Empire. Their understanding was the initial one relating to the Chris Columbus expedition to find the East Indies by venturing westward... of course he came upon the West Indies as we know it today. They were unrelenting in their arguement which was based on the original meaning of the term and I argued that words/terms change meaning over time. I offered the etymology of the word aweful as a paradigm but they discarded my arguement as an emotive retort from a local. So I came to Wikipedia for some consolation. I'm not sure that I found it but I am certain that I found a much more agreeable body for discussion and exchange of knowledge.

I hope this is good for now. I will try to add more to my page once I figure out how to structure it. I have tried to make some additions in the areas of Classics which is my field of study and passion at the moment. Maybe you could give some advice on how best to modify and add information. Thanks.

--rkstaylor 16:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

belated thanks
Thanks for supporting my RFA nearly a month ago. Unfortunately a sad event occurred at that time in my family, and I have not been able to participate in Wikipedia as much as I would like. I hope to get back to active contribution soon. Congratulations on your own promotion, too! FreplySpang (talk) 01:35, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you very much for your vote of confidence on my RFA. I'll keep trying to make the Wikipedia great! Thanks, Bratsche talk  5 pillars 13:18, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

RFA/MARMOT
That's a good question. Use the talk page and make a proposal; I'm sure you would get some great feedback. I'm all for it, but at the same time I want to make sure I know what IP addresses MARMOT is using so we can send an abuse letter to NTL. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 18:22, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Mezmerize
Thank you for protecting the page to avoid this user (66.36.136.123)'s vandalism. We are sorry about violating the 3 revert rule though. -- Mike Garcia | talk 23:53, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

No worries on the block. These disputes tend to get very out of control, so I think you did the right thing. When it is discussed and decided upon, feel free to update that infobox, or let me know and I will do it. Thanks again! Cbing01 (talk) 00:06, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My animals
I simply have no idea what that one was about, SqueakBox 00:14, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * It was high on my list, and I have no doubt that was it, SqueakBox 00:20, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

mesmerize
I know nothing about the subject of the article (I did a 10 second google search to aquire those links), but I'd like to see mike garcia not get banned. Ergo, I'd prefer the page stay protected for awhile. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 01:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mike Garcia
First of all, splendid pictures all over the user page. The flowers at the top of the talk are absolutely delightful.

Secondly, if you're interested at all in pursuing action against Mike Garcia I'm looking to start coallating evidence for an Arbitration Committee case, as you are at the moment just the latest of his many victims. Get back to me if you're interested. Wally 07:00, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Anonymous admin nominations
The last line of the Nomination standards block under the About RfA section states "Anonymous users cannot be nominated, nominate others, or vote. They are allowed to comment." Hope this clears any confusion. --Allen3 talk 17:16, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * ...Okay. I'll let it be :-) Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 17:17, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

List of snakes of Trinidad and Tobago
I like your lead. If I may make a few more suggestions: I'd like a "See Also" section with related articles (eg, snake- and T&T-related articles). That way the reader can navigate both more specific (ind. snakes) and more general (see also). Also, some external links would be helpful. It is a good list though! --Dmcdevit 20:14, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Christafari
It is still a redirect. Maybe you could do the honours. Interesting document. I don't like the sound of them at all. This group have been very active in Trinidad, a[pparently, where their founders wife comes from, trying to convert Rastas to Christianity, SqueakBox 00:55, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * No, the redirect works so it's fine, SqueakBox 01:16, Jun 27, 2005 (UTC)

snakes
looks good - T&T is the only place in the tropics I've ever seen snakes - on the whole they try to avoid us, I think. Seen two of the three UK ones, third is rare and local - maybe I should do snakes of the UK -wouldn't take long! your page looks good now, jimfbleak 05:01, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

my talk page
Thanks. It seems a lot of people have me watchlisted. -- Uncle Ed (talk) June 28, 2005 18:59 (UTC)

Hello
Yes. I'm back - although if Votes for deletion/Nottinghamshire v Yorkshire 26 June 2005 goes the wrong way it will mean the deletion of the whole of our coverage of the 2005 English cricket season and that I won't be staying long. Your "keep" vote on the VfD page would be very much appreciated. Kind regards, jguk 28 June 2005 22:21 (UTC)

admin. nom.
If you would like to make the nomination I would accept. It would be nice to revert vandalism with one click :-). I'm not sure what other admin duties I would want to jump into, guess I'd best do my homework. As you know I was a bit involved in the climate wars, mav referred to me as one of the other edit warriers, so some may object. Thanks, -Vsmith 28 June 2005 23:44 (UTC)

T&T snakes
Excellent work with getting rid of red links and reformatting - you'll see I've happily changed my vote on WP:FLC to support. My only comment is that you've created the snakes' articles at their Latin names and I'm fairly sure (though I must admit I haven't checked) that standard WP policy is to use common name. But I appreciate that might be a bit of a job, given that most of them seem to have more than one common name. Good work, anyway. OpenToppedBus - My Talk June 29, 2005 08:48 (UTC)

All the existing regional bird lists have the same general format as the T&T one, so I'm reluctant to change the style. It could do with more images, and, as you suggest some references, but my main priority is to actually write up the ones I've seen. jimfbleak 30 June 2005 18:43 (UTC)

Caribbean Wikipedians
I like your idea, count me in. Here are some other Caribbean Wikipedians whom I believe would also be interested. Wrote to them and tell them I sent you. They are: Cjrs 79, Joseph,<> and User:AntonioMartin, Let's keep in touch. Tony the Marine 1 July 2005 00:45 (UTC)

 * I'm in as well.   —Joseph | Talk July 1, 2005 02:56 (UTC)

 * Count me in1 Hey, thanks for inviting me. I love everything and everyone Caribbean and Latin American. What country are you from? I originated the article Deaths in Ciudad Juarez, and a person e-mailed me in an insulting way telling me since Im Puerto Rican I shouldn't care about Mexico, which, by the way, geographically speaking is also a Caribbean country by way of Cancun and Isla Mujeres. That rwally got me wonder about this person's mental health, because I believe all Latinos and Caribbeaners are brothers and sisters and I want to thank you for trying to organize this group. Im definitely there.

Once again, thank you and God bless you! Sincerely yours, Antonio El Cheveron del Caribe Martin

 * Hola Trinidad!!! Como estas?? Im happy to know you're from Trinidad. Beautiful country! Ive seen it on brochures only, through :(. I know only a couple of things from Trinidad: Maurice Hope, a fabulous, fabulous world boxing champion (you should have seen the beating he put on some European top fighters!) and BWIA, the airline. I hope you dont get mad at me for saying this like the Mexican person did, but I used to see them every saturday, back when their planes where white and yellow with a girl and a flower on the tail. I loved them! Now that they are green with an orange or lime drawn on the fuselage I love them even better!

Well, I agree with everything you said about some people trying to divide us Caribbeans and Latinos. I think its sad specially since all the things we have in common unite us as brothers. I was impressed one time to learn there are about 50 nations in the Caribbean alone, roughly 25 percent of the world! When you think 100 percent of these countries speak either Spanish, English or French, that should bond us even more. What you are doing here is excellent.

Well, I will say adios now, I hope to hear from ylu soon!

thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Caribbean Fiesta Martin

 * I'm in!!!This looks like a great idea. I'm also from Puerto Rico, and I'm willing to help and collaborate on this proejct in any way. Let's get it on! I'll keep in touch!:D <> 1 July 2005 07:23 (UTC)

 * Hi Guettarda,

CaribDigita here, I think that's a neat about Notice Board for Caribbean Wikipedians. I think a lot of 'common' regional good could be brought about by it. I am all for it! Count me in! CaribDigita 2 July 2005 17:55 (UTC)

Landscape ecology
I'm trying to winnow the geography category, but maybe got carried away. I've added the category back to Landscape ecology. Maurreen 1 July 2005 16:19 (UTC)

Single Info Boxes
I'm somewhat (well, relatively) new to Wikipedia and it seems to me that one of its virtues is that nobody's preference as to the content of an article stands higher than anyone else's. (From a statistical standpoint, I guess it adds to the accuracy of the information.)  That said, who arbitrates which style single infobox is "standard"? Would it be the writer of the article, or... just User:Cbing01? I'd be very grateful if you could shed any light on this matter!

 * I'm not exactly clear what you are asking, but I suspect you could find the answer at WikiProject Songs, WikiProject Music or WikiProject Albums. Inofoboxes tend to be standardised by individual WikiProjects, based on consensus.  I'm guessing that would be the place to discuss alternatives.  Guettarda 4 July 2005 07:03 (UTC)

This user posted a similar message on my talk page as well. I am not clear what they are asking, or implying (as it seems). If any of this is made more clear to you, would you please pass it along to me? I would be very grateful. Cbing01 4 July 2005 07:16 (UTC)

title: User talk:Guettarda/Archive5


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hip-hop underground

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was REDIRECT to Alternative hip hop. JeremyA 15:20, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hip-hop underground
The underground music scene of hip-hop. Dicdef. We need this just as much as an article on Rectangular tables. Just adds two concepts together.—Wahoofive (talk) 04:04, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Alternative hip hop. (Underground hip hop redirects there.) --Idont Havaname 06:02, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete dicdef. JamesBurns 06:36, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Crap.  Postdlf 06:39, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. Redundant. Jasonglchu 14:50, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. — Chameleon 19:34, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

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

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


text: Template:CATV

title: Template:CATV


text:
Xenops

Xenops is a genus in the bird family Furnariidae, the ovenbirds. The genus comprises four species of xenops, all of which are found in Mexico, Central America and South America, particularly in tropical rain forests.

They are small birds with a longish tail, a laterally flattened bill with an upturned tip (except in the slender-billed xenops), brown back and buff or rufous wing stripe. They forage for insects on bark, rotting stumps or bare twigs, moving mechanically in all directions on the trunk like a woodcreeper, but without using the tail as a prop.

Together with the distinct great xenops (Megaxenops parnaguae), this genus forms the tribe Xenopini, which based on some recent studies belongs in the woodcreeper and xenops subfamily Dendrocolaptinae, while others have found them to be part of the "traditional" ovenbirds. A study from 2013 found that they should be a family distinct from both.

Species
Formerly, the rufous-tailed xenops was placed in this genus, but it has been moved to the monotypic Microxenops. The following species remain in the genus Xenops:

title: Xenops


text:
Attempted schisms in the Baháʼí Faith

The Baháʼí Faith was formed in the late 19th-century Middle East by Baháʼu'lláh, and teaches that an official line of succession of leadership is part of a divine covenant that assures unity and prevents schism. There are no major schisms in the Baháʼí Faith, and attempts to form alternative leadership have either become extinct with time or have remained in extremely small numbers that are shunned by the majority. The largest extant sect is related to Mason Remey's claim to leadership in 1960, which has continued with two or three groups numbering at most 200 collectively, mostly in the United States.

About a dozen efforts have been made to form sects in the history of the Baháʼí Faith. The first major challenge to leadership came after Baháʼu'lláh died in 1892, with ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's half-brother Mírzá Muhammad ʻAlí opposing him. Later, Shoghi Effendi faced opposition from his family, as well as some individual Baháʼís. When Shoghi Effendi passed in 1957, there was no clear successor, and the Hands of the Cause led a transition to the Universal House of Justice, elected in 1963. This transition was opposed by Mason Remey, who claimed to be the successor of Shoghi Effendi in 1960, but was excommunicated by Hands of the Cause because his claim had no basis in authoritative Baháʼí writings. Other, more modern attempts at schism have come from opposition to the Universal House of Justice and attempts to reform or change doctrine.

Those that have been excommunicated have consistently protested against the majority group and, in some cases, claimed that the excommunicated represent the true Baháʼí Faith and the majority are Covenant-breakers. Some Baháʼís have claimed that there have been no divisions in the Baháʼí Faith, or that none will survive or become a threat to the main body of Baháʼís. From 2000-2020, twenty individuals were expelled by the Baháʼí Administration for Covenant-breaking.

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's ministry
Baháʼu'lláh remained in the Akka-Haifa area under house arrest until his death in 1892. According to the terms of his will, his eldest son ʻAbdu'l-Bahá was named the centre of authority; Mírzá Muhammad ʻAlí, the eldest son from Baháʼu'lláh's second wife, was assigned a secondary position.

With ʻAbdu'l-Bahá as the head of the Baháʼí community, soon Muhammad ʻAli started working against his elder brother, at first subtly and then in open opposition. Most members of the families of Baháʼu'lláh's second and third wives supported Muhammad ʻAlí; however, there were very few outside of Haifa who followed him.

Muhammad ʻAlí's machinations with the Ottoman authorities resulted in ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's re-arrest and confinement in Acre. They also caused the appointment of two official commissions of inquiry, which almost led to further exile and incarceration of ʻAbdu'l-Baha to North Africa. In the aftermath of the Young Turk revolution, Ottoman prisoners were freed thus ending the danger to ʻAbdu'l-Baha. Meanwhile, Ibrahim George Kheiralla, a Syrian Christian, converted to the Baháʼí Faith, emigrated to the United States and founded the first American Baháʼí community. Initially, he was loyal to ʻAbdu'l-Bahá. With time Kheiralla began teaching that ʻAbdu'l-Baha was the return of Christ, and this was becoming the widespread understanding among the Baháʼís in the United States, despite ʻAbdu'l-Baha's efforts to correct the mistake. Later on, Kheiralla switched sides in the conflict between Baháʼu'lláh's sons and supported Mirza Muhammad ʻAlí. He formed the Society of Behaists, a religious denomination promoting Unitarian Bahaism in the U.S., which was later led by Shua Ullah Behai, son of Mirza Muhammad ʻAlí, after he emigrated to the United States in June 1904 at the behest of his father. Muhammad ʻAlí's supporters either called themselves Behaists or "Unitarian Baháʼís". From 1934 to 1937, Behai published Behai Quarterly a Unitarian Bahai magazine written in English and featuring the writings of Muhammad ʻAlí and various other Unitarian Bahais.

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's response to determined opposition during his tenure was patterned on Baháʼu'lláh's example and evolved across three stages. Initially, like Baháʼu'lláh, he made no public statements but communicated with his brother Muhammad ʻAlí and his associates directly, or through intermediaries, in seeking reconciliation. When it became clear that reconciliation was not possible, and fearing damage to the community, ʻAbdu'l-Bahá wrote to the Baháʼís explaining the situation, identifying the individuals concerned and instructing the believers to sever all ties with those involved. Finally, he sent representatives to those areas most affected by the problem.

The function of these representatives was to explain matters to the Baháʼís and to encourage them to persevere in cutting all contact. Often these chosen individuals would have ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's authority to open up communications with those involved to try to persuade them to return. In Iran, such envoys were principally the four Hands of the Cause appointed by Baháʼu'lláh.

Aftermath
When ʻAbdu'l-Bahá died, his Will and Testament explained in some detail how Muhammad ʻAlí had been unfaithful to the Covenant, identifying him as a Covenant-breaker and appointing Shoghi Effendi as leader of the Faith with the title of Guardian. Baháʼí authors such as Hasan Balyuzi and Adib Taherzadeh set about refuting the claims of Muhammad ʻAlí. This represented what is often described as the most testing time for the Baháʼí Faith. The Behaists rejected the authority of the Will and Testament of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá, claiming loyalty to the leadership succession as they inferred it from Baha'u'llah's Kitab-i-Ahd.

This schism had very little effect. The claims were rejected by the vast majority of Baháʼís. Muhammad ʻAlí's supporters had mostly abandoned him by the time of his death in 1937. In the ʻAkká area, the followers of Muhammad ʻAlí represented six families at most, they had no common religious activities, and were almost wholly assimilated into Muslim society.

Appointment
At 24, Shoghi Effendi was particularly young when he assumed leadership of the religion in 1921, as provided for by ʻAbdu'l-Bahá in his Will and Testament. He had received a Western education at the Syrian Protestant College and later at Balliol College, Oxford.

At this time Muhammad-ʻAlí revived his claim to leadership of the Baháʼí community. He seized the keys of the Tomb of Baháʼu'lláh at the mansion of Bahjí, expelled its keeper, and demanded that he be recognized by the authorities as the legal custodian of that property. However, the Palestinian authorities, after having conducted some investigations, instructed the British officer in ʻAkká to deliver the keys into the hands of the keeper loyal to Shoghi Effendi.

American disputes
After the death of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá, Ruth White questioned the Will's authenticity as early as 1926, and openly opposed Shoghi Effendi's Guardianship, publishing several books on the subject. She wrote a letter to the United States Postmaster General and asked him, among other things, to prohibit the National Spiritual Assembly from "using the United States Mails to spread the falsehood that Shoghi Effendi is the successor of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá and the Guardian of the Cause." She also wrote a letter to the High Commissioner for Palestine; both of these letters were ignored.

Another division occurred primarily within the American Baháʼí community, which increasingly consisted of non-Persians with an interest in alternative spiritual pursuits. Many had been strongly attracted to the personality of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá and the spiritual teachings of the Baháʼí Faith. Some regarded it as an ecumenical society which all persons of goodwill—regardless of religion—might join. When Shoghi Effendi made clear his position that the Baháʼí Faith was an independent religion with its own distinct administration through local and national spiritual assemblies, a few felt that he had overstepped the bounds of his authority. Most prominent among them was a New York group including Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, Lewis and Julia Chanler, who founded the "New History Society", and its youth section, the Caravan of East and West. Sohrab and the Chanlers refused to be overseen by the New York Spiritual Assembly, and were expelled by Shoghi Effendi as Covenant-breakers. They argued that the expulsion was meaningless because they believed the faith could not be institutionalized. The New History Society published several works by Sohrab and Chanler and others. Sohrab accepted the legitimacy of Shoghi Effendi as Guardian, but was critical of the manner of his leadership and the methods of organizing the Baháʼí administration. The New History Society attracted fewer than a dozen Baháʼís, however its membership swelled to several thousand for a time. The New History Society was active until 1959 and is now defunct. The Caravan House, aka Caravan Institute, later disassociated itself from the Baháʼí Faith, and remained as an unrelated non-profit educational organization.

All of the divisions of this period were short-lived and restricted in their influence.

Family members expelled
In 1932 Shoghi Effendi's great aunt, Bahíyyih Khánum, died. She was highly respected and had instructed all to follow Shoghi Effendi through several telegrams she had sent around the world announcing the basics of the provisions of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá's will and was witness to the actions relatives took in violation of provisions of the will. Bahíyyih Khánum had devoted much of her life towards protecting the accepted leadership of the Baháʼí Faith and after Shoghi Effendi's appointment there was little internal opposition until after her death when nephews began to openly oppose Shoghi Effendi over Baháʼu'lláh's house in Baghdad. Some family members disapproved of his marriage to a Westerner, Mary Maxwell—daughter of one of the foremost disciples of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá—in 1937. They claimed that Shoghi Effendi introduced innovations beyond the Iranian roots of the Faith. This gradually resulted in his siblings and cousins disobeying his instructions and marrying into the families of Covenant-breakers, many of whom were expelled as Covenant-breakers themselves. However, these disagreements within Shoghi Effendi's family resulted in no attempts to create a schism favouring an alternative leader. At the time of his death in 1957, he was the only remaining male member of the family of Baháʼu'lláh who had not been expelled. Even his own parents had openly fought against him.

The founding of the Universal House of Justice
Shoghi Effendi died in 1957 without explicitly appointing a successor Guardian. He had no children, and during his lifetime all remaining male descendants of Baháʼu'lláh had been excommunicated as Covenant-breakers. He left no will. Shoghi Effendi's appointed Hands of the Cause unanimously voted it was impossible to legitimately recognize and assent to a successor. The Baháʼí community was in a situation not dealt with explicitly in the provisions of the Will and Testament of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá. Furthermore, the Universal House of Justice had not yet been elected, which represented the only Baháʼí institution authorized to adjudicate on matters not covered by the religion's three central figures. To understand the transition following the death of Shoghi Effendi in 1957, an explanation of the roles of the Guardian, the Hands of the Cause, and the Universal House of Justice is useful.

Guardianship

Other than allusions in the writings of Baháʼu'lláh to the importance of the Aghsán, the role of the Guardian was not mentioned until the reading of the Will and Testament of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá. Shoghi Effendi later expressed to his wife and others that he had no foreknowledge of the existence of the Institution of Guardianship, least of all that he was appointed as Guardian.

ʻAbdu'l-Bahá warned the Baháʼís to avoid the problems caused by his half-brother Muhammad ʻAlí. He stipulated the criteria and form for selecting future Guardians, which was to be clear and unambiguous. His will required that the Guardian appoint his successor "in his own life-time ... that differences may not arise after his [the Guardian's] passing". The appointee was required to be either the first-born son of the Guardian, or one of the Aghsán (literally: Branches; male descendants of Baháʼu'lláh). Finally, ʻAbdu'l-Bahá left a responsibility of ratifying the appointment to nine Hands of the Cause, elected from all of the Hands.

The will also vested authority in the Guardian's appointed assistants, known as the Hands of the Cause, giving them the right to "cast out from the congregation of the people of Bahá" anyone they deem in opposition to the Guardian.

Relationship between the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice
The roles of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice are complementary, the former providing authoritative interpretation, and the latter providing flexibility and the authority to adjudicate on "questions that are obscure and matters that are not expressly recorded in the Book." The authority of the two institutions was elucidated by ʻAbdu'l-Bahá in his will, saying that rebellion and disobedience towards either the Guardian or the Universal House of Justice, is rebellion and disobedience towards God. Shoghi Effendi went into further detail explaining this relationship in The World Order of Baháʼu'lláh, indicating that the institutions are interdependent.

Role of the Hands of the Cause
Shortly after Shoghi Effendi's death, the 27 then-living Hands of the Cause (Hands) deliberated over whether or not they could legitimately consent to any successor. Only two members present could translate between English and Persian. Following these events Time magazine reported that there were debates about two possible candidates for Guardian.

On 25 November 1957, the Hands signed a unanimous proclamation stating that he had died "without having appointed his successor"; that "it is now fallen upon us ... to preserve the unity, the security and the development of the Baháʼí World Community and all its institutions"; and that they would elect from among themselves nine Hands who would "exercise ... all such functions, rights and powers in succession to the Guardian of the Baháʼí Faith ... as are necessary to serve the interests of the Baháʼí World Faith, and this until such time as the Universal House of Justice ... may otherwise determine." This body of nine Hands became known as the Hands of the Cause in the Holy Land, sometimes referred to as the Custodians.

That same day the Hands passed a unanimous resolution that clarified who would have authority over various executive areas. Among these were:
 * "That the entire body of the Hands of the Cause, ... shall determine when and how the International Baháʼí Council shall pass through the successive stages outlined by Shoghi Effendi culminating in the election of the Universal House of Justice"
 * "That the authority to expel violators from the Faith shall be vested in the body of nine Hands [the Custodians], acting on reports and recommendations submitted by Hands from their respective continents."

In their deliberations following Shoghi Effendi's passing they determined that they were not in a position to appoint a successor, only to ratify one, so they advised the Baháʼí community that the Universal House of Justice would consider the matter after it was established.

In deciding when and how the International Baháʼí Council would develop into the Universal House of Justice, the Hands agreed to carry out Shoghi Effendi's plans for moving it from the appointed council, to an officially recognized Baháʼí Court, to a duly elected body, and then to the elected Universal House of Justice. In November 1959, referring to the goal of becoming recognized as a non-Jewish religious court in Israel, they said: "this goal, due to the strong trend towards the secularization of Religious Courts in this part of the world, might not be achieved." The recognition as a religious court was never achieved, and the International Baháʼí Council was reformed in 1961 as an elected body in preparation for forming the Universal House of Justice. The Hands of the Cause made themselves ineligible for election to both the council and the Universal House of Justice.

Upon the election of the Universal House of Justice at the culmination of the Ten Year Crusade in 1963, the nine Hands acting as interim head of the religion closed their office.

Charles Mason Remey
Charles Mason Remey was among the Hands who signed the unanimous proclamations in 1957, acknowledging that Shoghi Effendi had died without having appointed his successor. He was also among the nine Custodians initially elected to serve in the Holy Land as interim head of the religion.

On 8 April 1960, Remey made a written announcement that he was the second Guardian of the Baháʼí Faith and explained his "status for life as commander in chief of Baháʼí affairs of the world" in this proclamation which he requested to be read in front of the annual US convention in Wilmette.

He based his claim on his having been appointed President of the first International Baháʼí Council by Shoghi Effendi in 1951. The appointed council represented the first international Baháʼí body. Remey believed that his appointment as the council's president meant that he was the Guardian of the Baháʼí Faith. The Hands of the Cause wrote regarding his reasoning on this point, "If the President of the International Baháʼí Council is ipso facto the Guardian of the Baháʼí Faith, then the beloved Guardian, himself, Shoghi Effendi would have had to be the President of this first International Baháʼí Council." Remey was appointed president of the council in March 1951, then in December 1951 Remey was appointed a Hand of the Cause. A further announcement in March 1952 appointed several more officers to the Council and Rúhíyyih Khánum as the liaison between the Council and the Guardian.

Regarding the authority of the Hands of the Cause, Remey wrote in his letter that the Hands "have no authority vested in themselves ... save under the direction of the living Guardian of the Faith". He further commanded the Baháʼís to abandon plans for establishing the Universal House of Justice.

Remey never addressed the requirement that Guardians should be male-descendants of Baháʼu'lláh, of whom Remey was not. His followers later referred to letters and public statements of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá calling him "my son" as evidence that he had been implicitly adopted but these claims were almost universally rejected by the body of the Baháʼís.

In response, and after having made many prior efforts to convince Remey to withdraw his claim, the Custodians took action and sent a cablegram to the National Spiritual Assemblies on 26 July 1960. Two days later, the Custodians sent Mason Remey a letter informing him of their unanimous decision to declare him a Covenant-breaker. They cited the Will and Testament of ʻAbdul-Bahá, the unanimous joint resolutions of 25 November 1957, and their authority in carrying out the work of the Guardian as their justification. Anyone who accepted Remey's claim to the Guardianship was also expelled. In a 9 August 1960 letter to the other Hands, the Custodians seem to acknowledge that Remey was not senile or unbalanced, but he was carrying out a "well thought out campaign" to spread his claim.

Decision of the Universal House of Justice

The Baháʼí institutions and believers around the world pledged their loyalty to the Hands of the Cause, who dedicated the next few years to completing Shoghi Effendi's Ten Year Crusade, culminating with the election of the Universal House of Justice in 1963. It was at this time the Custodians officially passed their authority as the head of the Faith to the Universal House of Justice, which soon announced that it could not appoint or legislate to make possible the appointment of a second Guardian to succeed Shoghi Effendi.

A short time later it elaborated on the situation in which the Guardian would die without being able to appoint a successor, saying that it was an obscure question not covered by Baháʼí scriptures, that no institution or individual at the time could have known the answer, and that it therefore had to be referred to the Universal House of Justice, whose election was confirmed by references in Shoghi Effendi's letters that after 1963 the Baháʼí world would be led by international plans under the direction of the Universal House of Justice.

A break in the line of Guardians
Mason Remey and his successors asserted that a living Guardian is essential for the Baháʼí community, and that the Baháʼí writings required it. The basis of these claims were almost universally rejected by the body of the Baháʼís, for whom the restoration of scripturally sanctioned leadership of the Universal House of Justice proved more attractive than the claims of Mason Remey.

The House commented that its own authority was not dependent on the presence of a Guardian, and that its legislative functioning was unaffected by the absence of a Guardian. It stated that in its legislation it would be able to turn to the mass of interpretation left by Shoghi Effendi. The Universal House of Justice addressed this issue further early after its election clarifying that "there is nowhere any promise or guarantee that the line of Guardians would endure forever; on the contrary there are clear indications that the line could be broken."

Mason Remey as second Guardian
All Baháʼís who professed belief in Mason Remey as the second Guardian implicitly did not accept the Universal House of Justice established in 1963, and are shunned by members of the mainstream Baháʼí Faith. Likewise, Remey at one point declared that the Hands of the Cause were Covenant-breakers, that they lacked any authority without a Guardian, that those following them "should not be considered Baháʼís", and that the Universal House of Justice that they helped elect in 1963 was not legitimate.

Remey attracted about 100 followers in the United States and a few others in Pakistan and Europe. Remey maintained his claim to Guardianship, and went on to establish what came to be known as the Orthodox Baháʼís Under the Hereditary Guardianship, which later broke into several other divisions based on succession disputes within the groups that followed Remey. Although initially disturbing, the mainstream Baháʼís paid little attention to his movement within a few years. As of 2006 his followers represent two or three groups that maintain little contact with each other, comprising at most a few hundred members collectively.

Initially, Remey had followers in Pakistan, India, the United States, and parts of Europe. He settled in Florence, Italy, until the end of his life. From there he appointed three local spiritual assemblies in Santa Fe, New Mexico, Rawalpindi, Pakistan, and Lucknow, India, then organized the election of two National Assemblies - in the United States and Pakistan.

In 1964 the Santa Fe assembly filed a lawsuit against the National Spiritual Assembly (NSA) of the Baháʼís of the United States to receive the legal title to the Baháʼí House of Worship in Illinois, and all other property owned by the NSA. The NSA counter-sued and won. The Santa Fe assembly lost the right to use the term "Baháʼí" in printed material. Remey then changed the name of his sect from "Baháʼís Under the Hereditary Guardianship" to "Abha World Faith" and also referred to it as the "Orthodox Faith of Baháʼu'lláh". In 1966, Remey asked the Santa Fe assembly to dissolve, as well as the second International Baháʼí Council that he had appointed with Joel Marangella, residing in France, as president.

Beginning in 1966-67, Remey was abandoned by almost all of his followers. The followers of Mason Remey were not organized until several of them began forming their own groups based on different understandings of succession, even before his death in 1974. The majority of them claimed that Remey was showing signs of senility. The small Baháʼí sects that adhere to Remey as Guardian are now largely confined to the United States, and have no communal religious life.

Orthodox Baháʼí Faith
In 1961 Joel Marangella received a letter from Remey, and a note that, "in or after 1963. You will know when to break the seal." In 1964 Remey appointed members to a second International Baháʼí Council with Marangella as president, significant due to Remey's claim to Guardianship being based on the same appointment. In 1965 Remey activated the council, and in 1966 wrote letters passing the "affairs of the Faith" to the council, then later dissolving it. In 1969 Marangella made an announcement that the letter of 1961 was Remey's appointment of him as the third Guardian, and that he had been the Guardian since 1964, invalidating Remey's pronouncements from that point forward.

Marangella gained the support of most of Remey's followers, who came to be known as Orthodox Baháʼís. Membership data is scarce. One source estimated them at no more than 100 members in 1988, and the group claimed a United States membership of about 40 in a 2007 court case. Joel Marangella died in San Diego, California on 1 September 2013. An unverified website claiming to represent Orthodox Baháʼís indicates followers in the United States and India, and a fourth Guardian named Nosrat’u’llah Bahremand.

Harvey, Soghomonian, and Yazdani
Donald Harvey was appointed by Remey as "Third Guardian" in 1967. This group does not use a formal name but "Universal Faith and Revelation of Baháʼu'lláh" and "Baháʼís loyal to the fourth Guardian" have been used by its adherents. Donald Harvey never gained much of a following.

Francis Spataro of New York City, who supported Donald Harvey's claim as Remey's successor, independently organized "The Remey Society" after losing favor with Harvey. Spataro had a newsletter with about 400 recipients and in 1987 published a biography of Charles Mason Remey. In 1995 Francis Spataro became an Old Catholic priest and left the Baháʼí religion altogether.

After Harvey's death in 1991, leadership of this group went to Jacques Soghomonian, a resident of Marseilles, France. Soghomonian died in 2013 and passed the successorship to E.S. Yazdani.

Leland Jensen
Leland Jensen accepted Remey's claim to the Guardianship and later left the group. In 1969 he was convicted of "a lewd and lascivious act" for sexually molesting a 15-year-old female patient, and he served four years of a twenty-year sentence in the Montana State Prison. It was in prison that Jensen converted several inmates to his ideas of being what he called the "Establisher" of the Baháʼí Faith. After being paroled in 1973 and before Remey's death, Jensen formed an apocalyptic cult called the Baháʼís Under the Provisions of the Covenant. Membership in his group peaked at 150-200 leading up to Jensen's prophecy of a nuclear holocaust for 29 April 1980, but the disconfirmation caused most of his followers to abandon him.

Jensen's chosen successor to the Guardianship was Remey's adopted son Pepe, a role that Pepe rejected, and Jensen died in 1996 with ambiguous leadership for his few remaining followers, who fractured in 2001 when one of them claimed to be the Guardian. Adherents were mostly concentrated in Montana.

Reginald ("Rex") King
Rex King was elected to Remey's NSA of the United States with the most votes, and soon came into conflict with Remey. In 1969 he traveled to Italy with the hope of having Remey pass affairs over to him, but instead was labeled with the "station of satan". King then encouraged Marangella to open the sealed letter from Remey and supported his claim, but soon took issue with the way Marangella was interpreting scripture. King rejected all claimants to the Guardianship after Shoghi Effendi including Remey. He claimed that he, Rex King, was a "regent" pending the emergence of the second Guardian who was in "occultation". Hardly anyone followed King. He called his group the Orthodox Baháʼí Faith under the Regency. King died in 1977 and appointed four of his family as a council of regents, who later changed their name to "Tarbiyat Baha'i Community". There are no size estimates from independent sources, but they maintain a website and appear to be a small group of mostly Rex King's family that maintained some activity into the early 2000s.

Size and demographics
The following quotes from various sources describe the relative size and demographics of those who followed Mason Remey.

"the Orthodox Baha'i Faith, a group that claims to have active centers in Great Britain, Germany, Pakistan and the United States."

- Anita Fussell, writing for the Lincoln Journal Star (18 March 1973)

"It is impossible to say how many [BUPC] believers there were on the eve of April 29, 1980, but roughly 150 people in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Arkansas made plans to enter fallout shelters ... On the night of April 28, about eighty believers met at a potluck feast in Missoula for the last time before Armageddon ... On May 16 the Missoula group finally gathered for its first feast since April 29. Thirty-six believers attended ... almost all the believers outside of Montana eventually rejected [Leland Jensen]'s teachings. Everyone in the Arkansas group defected, as did most of the believers in Colorado and Wyoming. To our knowledge, only three members of the Colorado group remained steadfast by the end of the summer, and possibly two in Wyoming ... the size of [Leland Jensen]'s active following remains small [in 1982]"

- Balch et al.

"Remey died in 1974, having appointed a third Guardian, but the number of adherents to the Orthodox faction remains extremely small. Although successful in Pakistan, the Remeyites seem to have attracted no followers in Iran. Other small groups have broken away from the main body from time to time, but none of these has attracted a sizeable following."

- Denis MacEoin

"They call themselves Orthodox Bahais, and their following is small – a mere 100 members, with the largest congregation, a total of 11, living in Roswell, N.M."

- Nancy Ryan, writing for the Chicago Tribune (10 June 1988)

"Rejected by his fellow Hands and the overwhelming majority of Bahá'ís, Remey was expelled from the Bahá'í Faith. Nevertheless, his claim did gain significant minority support in some countries, notably France, the United States and Pakistan. However, Remey's followers soon became divided into a number of antagonistic factions, and by the time of his death (in 1974), the number of Bahá'ís who recognized his claims had greatly diminished. A few Remeyite splinter-groups continue to operate in the United States"

- Momen & Smith

"Remey succeeded in gathering a few supporters, mainly in the United States, France, and Pakistan ... The followers of Remey have decreased in importance over the years, especially as they fragmented into contending factions ... [the group led by Joel Marangella] number no more than one hundred ... Small Remeyite groups are now confined to a few states in the United States."

- Moojan Momen

"By the end of the 1970s Jensen also had attracted followers in Wyoming, Colorado, and Arkansas. Since 1980 membership in the BUPC has fluctuated considerably, but it probably never exceeded 200 nationwide, despite Jensen's claims of having thousands of followers around the world. In 1994, the last year for which we have a membership list, there were only sixty-six members in Montana and fewer than twenty in other states. The Wyoming and Arkansas contingents disbanded after the 1980 disconfirmation, but new groups were formed in Minnesota and Wisconsin ... By 1990 the group probably had fewer than 100 members nationwide ... the defection rate accelerated in the 1990s"

- Balch et al.

"There are a few hundred Americans who claim to follow Mason Remey"

- Peter Terry

"Mason Remey gained the support of a small but widespread group of Baháʼís for his claim to be the second Guardian of the Faith (1960). Most of his long-term followers were Americans."

- Peter Smith

"Some American believers ... followed Remey ... When Remey died, several of his lieutenants vied for the position of "third" Guardian, dividing his followers into numerous sects, none of which have grown ... [no Baháʼí schism] has succeeded in garnering substantial support, with most groups eventually dying out altogether."

- Michael McMullen

"Total membership in the various Remeyite groups numbers only in the thousands."

- William Garlington

""the Baha'i Under the Provisions of the Covenant ... is headquartered in Missoula, Montana, and claims a membership approaching 150,000, although this is almost certainly an exaggeration.""

- Carol Matthews

"[Remey] acquired 100 followers in the United States, some dozens in Pakistan, and a score in Europe ... The Remey movement continues to this day as two or three groups that maintain little contact with each other, are active on the World Wide Web, and probably comprise a few hundred members collectively."

- Gallagher & Ashcraft

"the [Orthodox Baháʼí Faith] in the United States is a very small religious community, composed of only about forty persons"

- Jeffrey A. Goldberg, Attorney for Orthodox Baháʼí Faith Respondents

"About 15 Baháʼís initially followed Remey and were accordingly themselves declared Covenant breakers."

- Hugh C. Adamson

"The National Assembly of France and about 100 others followed Remey."

- Manya Brachear, writing for the Chicago Tribune (18 May 2009)

"the Orthodox Baháʼí Faith has perhaps 100 members, and the various other groups together probably total another 100 at most."

- Robert Stockman

"the exiled Baha'is constitute only 5000 to 8000 Baha'is worldwide according to some estimates. Some consider even those numbers to be excessively exaggerated."

- Vernon Johnson, citing Susan Maneck and Karen Bacquet posting in discussion forum talk.religion.bahai

"Today the Baháʼí community has some 5 million members; the Orthodox Baháʼí Faith perhaps 100; and the Baháʼís Under the Provisions of the Covenant several dozen, who are in turn divided into two sects, one of which appears to be inactive."

- Robert Stockman

Free Baháʼís
The term Free Baháʼís has been used by or about a small number of Baháʼís that have rejected the authority of Shoghi Effendi.

The term was first used by Hermann Zimmer, who revived the earlier claims of Ruth White that the Will and Testament of ʻAbdu'l-Bahá was forged. White's claim was widely rejected by other Baháʼís of the time, including Baháʼís who, like her, were enemies of Shoghi Effendi. White was able to gather the support of a single Baháʼí in Germany, Wilhelm Herrigel, who took up her cause; only a few Western Baháʼís followed him, and most repudiated him following his death in 1932.

Zimmer wrote a polemic attacking the Baháʼí administration in 1971, entitled A Fraudulent Testament devalues the Baháʼí Religion into Political Shogism, which was widely distributed by Evangelical Protestant organizations in Germany, and later translated into English and distributed worldwide.

Zimmer made plans with Charles Seeburger, a similarly-minded individual in Philadelphia, to establish a group of "Free Baháʼís" or the "World Union of Universal Religion and Universal Peace", but the idea soon went defunct.

Frederick Glaysher
Frederick Glaysher of Michigan left the mainstream Bahá’í community in 1996 and wrote critically of the Bahá’í administration. In 2004, he initiated several websites dedicated to an exposition of the Bahá’í teachings which excoriated the administration from Shoghi Effendi onward. He claimed to have been inspired by Ruth White, Mirza Ahmad Sohrab, and others. Aiming to initiate the same kind of reformation that Martin Luther did when his "95 Theses" sparked the Protestant Reformation, Glaysher launched his appeal by advancing "95 Theses of the Reform Bahá’í Faith". He briefly had a follower in India in the 2000s and some followers in New Zealand in the late 2000s and early 2010s. Glaysher delivered a talk to an interfaith group in Troy, Michigan in 2012, and the movement appears to have gone defunct soon after.

The Man
"The House of Mankind and the Universal Palace of Order" followed Jamshid Ma'ani and John Carré, but appears now to be defunct. In the early 1970s a Persian man named Jamshid Ma'ani claimed he was "The Man", a new Manifestation of God. He gained a few dozen Iranian Baháʼí followers. John Carré heard of Ma'ani, and wrote a book trying to get other Baháʼís to accept a new, third Manifestation. Carré invited Ma'ani to live in his home in California, but soon concluded, after living with him for four months, that he was not at all godly or spiritual, and certainly was not a Manifestation of God. Ma'ani went back to Iran, and Carré ended all association with him.

title: Attempted schisms in the Baháʼí Faith


text:
User:Sithlord

Hello, I don't know what to put on my page here it goes but:

Likes:

I like Star Wars, Star Trek, Star Gate (anything with Star in it :-) I like Buffy & Angel, I like Law & Order and Lenny/Jerry Orbach (May he Rest in Peace) Dislikes:

Eating my Veggies :-) Like I said I don't know what to put on my page, if I did this wrong please let me know and I'll fix it.

If my Camera was working I'll have a photo of me up.

--Marc 04:09, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

title: User:Sithlord


text:
Costa Blanca

The Costa Blanca (,, literally meaning "White Coast") is over 200 km of Mediterranean coastline in the Alicante province, on the southeastern coast of Spain. It extends from the town of Dénia in the north, beyond which lies the Costa del Azahar (or Costa dels Tarongers), to Pilar de la Horadada in the south, beyond which lies the Costa Cálida.

The name Costa Blanca was coined in the 1950s as a way to promote tourism. The region has a well-developed tourism industry and is a popular destination for British and German tourists.

The localities along the Costa Blanca are Alicante (Alicante/Alacant), Altea, Benidorm, Benissa (Benisa), Calp (Calpe), Dénia (Denia), Elche (Elche/Elx), El Campello (Campello), Finestrat, Guardamar del Segura, L'Alfàs del Pi (Alfaz del Pi), Orihuela Costa, Pilar de la Horadada, Santa Pola, Teulada–Moraira, Torrevieja, Villajoyosa (Villajoyosa/La Vila Joiosa) and Xàbia (Xàbia/Jávea). Benidorm and Alicante are the major tourist centres.

History
The Iberians are the oldest people known to have lived in what is now Alicante province. Among several Iberian archaeologic sites, La Serreta (near Alcoy) is noteworthy as the location of the longest inscriptions ever found in the (still undeciphered) Iberian language.

During the same period, the Phoenicians (in Guardamar) and Greeks (along the coast north of Alicante city) created coastal colonies and interacted with the Iberians. The Lady of Elche is a famous archeological find from this period.

After a brief Carthaginian period, the Romans took over the area. Several cities thrived along the Via Augusta, which connected this part of Iberia to the rest of the Roman empire. One of those cities, Ilici Augusta (now Elche) even reached the status of colonia.

Following two centuries of rule by the Visigoths, the area was captured by Islamic armies and became a part of Al Andalus. Beginning in the 13th century, kings like Ferdinand III of Castile, James I of Aragon, Alfonso X of Castile, and James II of Aragon slowly reconquered the cities in the area.

What is now Alicante province was initially split between the Crown of Castile and the Crown of Aragon by means of the Treaty of Almizra. Later, the whole territory became under the control of the Kingdom of Valencia, which was one of the domains of the Crown of Aragon.

Politics
Today, Alicante has 12 deputies in the Spanish Parliament. It also has 36 deputies in the Corts Valencianes, the regional parliament of the Valencian Community.

Climbing
Costa Blanca is a popular climbing location thanks to its limestone crags and good weather conditions.

title: Costa Blanca