text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zen-master

Case Opened on 19:11, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Case Closed on 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Case Modified on 19:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at /Workshop and voting on proposed decisions at /Proposed decision.

Involved parties

 * About a dozen editors talked for 2 and 1/2 weeks with Zen-master on Talk:Race_and_intelligence regarding his concerns with the article. Nectarflowed and Zen-master conducted a lengthy discussion on Zen-master's talk page, trying to resolve the concerns in one-on-one discussion.
 * Zen-master has been the subject of an RFA for name-calling on the race and intelligence talk page, 3 votes coming in on June 22 and the 4rth on June 26. Results were  (2/2/0/0).
 * Zen-master has been the subject of a proposed policy enforcement ban on June 30 for disruptive personal remarks on Talk:Race_and_intelligence.)

Statement by Nectarflowed
Summarizing the context this dispute occurs in, Race and intelligence is an article that has been scrutinized by a recent VFD, which it passed by about 40-6, and by a request for peer-review. The article was written by about a dozen users, many of them professional scientists working in fields that give them expertise. The article was regarded during the VFD as being exceptionally well-referenced, and is in line with published statements of mainstream science on the matter.

Though Zen-master's argument isn't under question here, I should summarize. He believes that framing the racial IQ disparity under question in terms of race presupposes a genetic cause. Users have responded with different arguments, and my summary is that, assuming genetics are not involved, "racial IQ disparity" would still be the appropriate frame, as the difference in average IQ still exists between races. This is analagous to the phrases "gender IQ disparity" and "socioeconomic IQ disparity." Note that these terms aren't actually in use; they just refer to the frame of the article.

Over a period of a couple weeks, Zen-master failed to convince any of the roughly dozen users who engaged with him on the discussion page of the validity of his argument, though they talked with him at length. A number of users have expressed to him that they regard his behavior as being disruptive, and during this time, work on the article has all but ceased. A number of users have complained about his accusations and name-calling, especially calling people - themselves and their actions - "racist," "Nazi," and "evil." Some formerly-regular users have expressed their frustration and have stopped participating on the page or have stopped making contributions to Wikipedia, though this may be temporary. Zen-master has been asked to apologize a number of times by different users, including the mediator, Uncle Ed, both prior and following his proposed policy enforcement ban, but he has yet to do so. At one point, several days after the RFA regarding him, he moved "Race and intelligence" to "race and IQ," even though consensus had clearly rejected his proposal.

Zen-master has been warned or asked to stop name-calling related to this article maybe 15 times. Following the RFA and proposed policy enforcement ban for disruptive personal remarks, he wrote the following on the race and intelligence discussion page. "Even a random racist would seek a true scientific basis for their beliefs but you've gone way beyond that, you and others have perverted science and language into a racist economic caste system mass propaganda tool. You must have some need for racism and "IQ based classism" to exist in the world."

Discussion having not convinced anybody, Zen-master has lately taken his argument from the discussion page to the article itself, and has attempted to make large changes that he knows are disagreed with by all of the regular editors of this page. Edit wars ensued. On July 2 he reverted 4 times, was warned, and then reverted a 5th time.

Zen-master has demonstrated an unusually strong commitment to POV-pushing and has consistently behaved disruptively in discussion. A number of users on race and intelligence talk have expressed that he has demonstrated a lack of significant experience in both the research areas race, and intelligence. If it's possible, I recommend Zen-master be banned from editing any article on either race or intelligence, as it would be a waste of time to have to go through this again at race or intelligence etc.--Nectarflowed T 3 July 2005 03:10 (UTC)

 * The following users can verify my statement, listed in rough order of degree of involvement in this dispute:Drummond (aka DAD), Rikurzhen, Patrick0Moran (aka P0M), Arbor, Dd2, Silverback, Nat Krause.--Nectarflowed T 3 July 2005 22:26 (UTC)

Statement by User:Zen-master
I think mediation or exposing the issue to a larger number of people might be the best first step at resolving the race and intelligence dispute, though I welcome this space to clear up the many inaccuracies that User:Nectarflowed presented above.

An article surviving VfD is not evidence that the content is neutral, on the contrary, many people errantly nominate articles that instead need a POV clean up rather than deletion. I share the earlier VfD nominator's concerns that the race and intelligence article presents the subject so unfairly as to be uncleanupable, which may be true but I thought I'd give it a shot.

User:Nectarflowed and many other pro "intelligence research" editors fail to acknowledge criticisms against the "intelligence research" field in general and "race and intelligence" in particular. Despite how Nectraflowed characterizes my criticisms above, I have not (yet) disputed the "pro" sources for the article directly (have not advocated their removal), instead, I have tried to clean up neutrality violations that completely ignore the existence of valid criticisms and lack of consensus on multiple levels. These neutrality violations include: exclusive and subtly tricky framing of the issue only in terms of "race", poor or suggestive word choices, and ambiguous or outright misleading sentence construction. Just because a source was in a "peer reviewed" journal is not evidence that other cited criticisms from other reputable sources should be discounted out of hand. "Race" and "intelligence research" does not exist in a vacuum where there are no criticisms on multiple levels, the talk page and archive have numerous citations demonstrating this fact. The "pro" editors of race and intelligence seemingly would revert even a synopsis of the scientific racism article which is very relevant to this dispute as it is a core criticism of the field and the way race and intelligence uses implied conclusions in particular.

These handful of editors allied with User:Nectarflowed seem singularly interested in denying any mention of criticisms of the subject. A majority of editors can not violate Wikipedia's policy of presenting a subject neutrally, especially when there is no consensus in the wider academic community. The neutrality violations in the article are much more serious than what you might see in a run of the mill edit war amongst POV pushers, the language confusion and one sided framing of the issue, combined with repetition, seems to me to be designed to psychologically trick the reader into assuming "race" is the cause for the "IQ disparity" when there is no scientific consensus for that conclusion and no scientific consensus to even present the issue only that way. One test results data correlation pair "race" vs "IQ" is not conclusive or the only way to frame the issue given the many other data correlation pairs from the exact same data such as "wealth" vs "nutrition". In my interpretation, these "pro" editors of race and intelligence intentionally perpetuate and defend intentionally misleading or psychologically tricky presumption inducing language for political rather than objective scientific purposes. Note the suspicious, unscientific use of emphases that I tried to clean up. Also note I and one other editor User:Willmcw were reverted just adding the {TotallyDisputed} header to the article, which is curious given the talk page, the archive, and now a second RfA which I submit as evidence that there is indeed a legitimate neutrality dispute.  Even more suspicious was the outright deletion of talk page discussions through a long series of edits described as "archiving" (check the byzantine talk page history for the full story).  And finally the readibility of my first list of citations was seemingly intentionally damaged and mischaracterized, certainly not addressed or acknowledge directly. Even more recently the talk page was suspiciously and suddenly archived a second time, with 2 core discussions that were the most critical of the article and active the day before, plus numerous others discussions active within 5 days before. The handful of "pro" editors seems to have a pattern of being unnecessarily verbose generally, and they seem to immediately create tangential or superfluous discussions underneath core criticism discussions perhaps for the purpose of filling up the talk page to hasten the need for archiving and to minimize the exposure and readability of criticisms for third parties.

On a separate note, I am still unclear as to how User:Ed Poor appointed himself "mediator" given the fact that he is directly involved in the dispute and can not be considered neutral on this issue.

I do not understand Nectarflow's point above that many editors of the article are "intelligence researchers" themselves or experts in the field. How is that not "original research"? If some editors of a particular article potentially have a vested financial or political interest in presenting their pet subject doesn't that mean there is a greater chance of neutrality violations? The history and talk page are nothing but attempts at denying valid criticisms, what benefit did these experts add to the article? See Talk:Race and intelligence and Why don't "intelligence researchers" generally seem to follow the scientific method especially as far as just presenting the subject goes? If the "pro" editors are themselves "intelligence researchers" with a training in the scientific method then the lack of language neutrality and choice of presentation method used in the article is exponentially more puzzling. The only thing the "pro" race and intelligence editors seem to be experts in is the psychology of language. zen master T 3 July 2005 07:32 (UTC)

User:PatrickOMoran's statement below is a great example of how repetition and one sided framing of the issue can be used to trick readers into forming presumptive conclusions about the subject. "Skin color vs skin cancer" is a carefully chosen analogy by POM to once again force the reader to only think about "race" and "intelligence" in terms of "race" so description can be confused with cause later on. POM's analogy also happens to be completely inaccurate, skin color is not the cause of skin cancer, sunlight and diet etc are (or is POM arguing/hinting otherwise?). The pro editors of race and intelligence's repetition misdirects away from the fact that the article is not just about description of the issue, the article is also about the cause for the issue. And most suspiciously, the article only discusses the implications of just one cause, "race". The criticisms against the article, area of research and method of presentation are fundamental, a provably one sided presentation of a subject should be disallowed. The very first sentence in the race and intelligence article is problematic on multiple levels: "...and practical consequences of group differences in intelligence" which not only induces readers to presumptively conclude that some sort of "group" based "IQ disparity" exists it also implies "race" is the cause. That sentence and "intelligence research" overall seems to be designed to achieve some sort of political result, divide and conquer, it effectively imposes a fabricated "IQ" based caste system upon society. If nutrition is the cause of the "IQ disparity" then instead of "consequences" the field should be focused on (or at least mention) ways of improving nutrition but most tellingly it does not. POM even says this:

 * "Ironically, one cannot hope to defeat the proposition that there is an actual causal connection (and not a mere correlation) between [race] and [intelligence] without looking at the evidence, criticisms of the studies, etc. -- which is exactly what the article on [intelligence] and [race] is intended to do."

Which completely misframes criticisms against the "intelligence research" field. Critics, including myself, accuse the intelligence research field of errantly implying, at a fundamental level, that "race" is the cause for the "intelligence" disparity because of the one sided way they present the issue. They ignore all other data correlations that might be causes and they repeatedly only want to present the issue in terms of "race" and "intelligence" when there are many other valid and scientific ways of looking at it (the issue is abstract in fact). Critics of the field are not advocating that "race" and "intelligence" evidence should be discarded, instead, they are precisely accusing the "intelligence research" field itself of, for some apparently political reason, choosing to only look at one set of evidence themselves. The key question is: if the issue can be presented multiple ways is it scientific and neutral to present it only one way? The pro editors do indeed ignore/misdirect away from the fact that the issue can be presented/thought of in multiple ways. Given the meaning of the phrase "sugar and tooth decay" there can be no doubt that "race and intelligence" is at best ambiguous and at worst presumptively conclusive inducing. If the pro editors of race and intelligence truly valued the scientific method they would not support the use of what is, at the very least, ambiguous language, they would want to expose their issue to the light of day and have conclusions be based on neutrally presented facts, instead of conclusion being induced through psychologically tricky language. zen master T 23:34, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment by User:Drummond (DAD)
I have been a target of Zen-master's behavior. I had been hopeful that, given the relative lull in Zen-master's postings, the behavior indicated by Nectarflowed would not reoccur. Today, Zen-master resumed his behavior. Race and intelligence was recently nominated for featured article status and many productive suggestions have been made on its comments page. Zen-master posted a comment in which he theorized that all authors on the article are "ultra racist" and "insanely politically motived[sic]". He has continued to push a consistent POV, though results of a recent straw-poll he initiated indicates that no other editor shared his POV. I have lost my cool with him once after being called "evil" and told to "enjoy [my] jail cell"; User:Ed Poor intervened and requested that we (and User:Patrick0Moran) unconditionally apologize to each other, which Patrick and I did  while Zen-master did not. Zen-master's behavior has been unpleasant and upsetting to me, as I have no way to defend myself (his accusations are enough), and has also been disruptive to community work on a highly controversial issue. As a scientist working in population genetics in a cognitive science degree program, I have some expertise in the subject, but have spent a disproportionate amount of time dealing with Zen-master's attacks and rather naive diatribes. I strongly support Nectarflowed's RFA. --DAD T 04:41, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment by User:Patrick0Moran (P0M)
Zen-master assumes malice and conspiracy where only good will (and sometimes impatience) exists:

 * The handful of "pro" editors seems to have a pattern of being unnecessarily verbose generally, and they seem to immediately create tangential or superfluous discussions underneath core criticism discussions perhaps for the purpose of filling up the talk page to hasten the need for archiving and to minimize the exposure and readability of criticisms for third parties.

Probably Zen-master is talking about my verbosity. What he describes as tangential discussions are those that try to get at an underlying problem of unclear thinking. They may seem verbose to Zen-master because when a short criticism that would hopefully "clue in" another contributer fails then one is tempted to try to explain things starting from a more fundamental level.

I have steadfastly avoided characterizing the personal attributes of Zen-master. I have also not characterized this contributor's ideological stance.

I have tried, perhaps too strenuously, to move this contributor past one fundamental obstacle to clear thinking. I have outlined a structure for a set of articles that would more clearly contextualize the discussion/debate about [intelligence] and [race]. Zen-master has never responsively commented on any of my attempts, and has never moved beyond the log jam exemplified in his words above:

 * One test result data correlation pair{,} "race" vs "IQ"{,} is not conclusive or the only way to frame the issue given the many other data correlation pairs from the exact same data such as "wealth" vs "nutrition".

I've tried to clarify the meaning a bit by indicating a deletion  and two additions {,}

Zen-master makes a fundamental thinking error, apparently believing that one could discover some correlation, e.g., a connection between skin color and skin cancer, through a process of looking at every possible "data correlation pair" except the pair called "skin color and skin cancer." In the passage above, it even seems that Zen-master might be advocating examining every possible data correlation pair that includes neither skin color nor skin cancer. As the tag line in the old joke has it, "You can't get there from here."

Nectarflowed spent hours trying and failing to get Zen-master to look at this issue and similar issues. (See Zen-master's talk page.) Other people have made my point directly to Zen-master in direct answer to his remarks in ways that are more succinct and clear than mine. In all cases Zen-master has successfully defended himself from looking at the fundamental problem. He typically repeats earlier charges that assume that his interlocutors harbor ill will toward him and/or deep-dyed ideological biases. Above, for instance, he speaks of "exclusive and subtly tricky framing of the issue only in terms of 'race'". Ironically, one cannot hope to defeat the proposition that there is an actual causal connection (and not a mere correlation) between [race] and [intelligence] without looking at the evidence, criticisms of the studies, etc. -- which is exactly what the article on [intelligence] and [race] is intended to do.

Without tediously following through hours of old discussion page records it may be difficult to isolate the fundamental sources of trouble.

(1) I asked Ed Poor to have a look at the "Race and Intelligence" discussion page because Zen-master was calling names. False accusations can be very damaging to individuals, and I wanted it stopped. That was the one issue that I thought needed immediate attention from a respected senior member of the Wikipedia community.

(2) The fundamental question of clear thinking will not go away. It is so basic to the way that Zen-master looks at things that it is difficult to see a way forward while it remains unrecognized and unresolved. If someone will not go through a discussion in a logical and consequential manner, and insists on making strongly negative axiological judgments against those who disagree with him/her, then there is no real process of communication and the correct response would seem to be to detach from the encounter.

(3) If Zen-master had not shifted his efforts to editing the article in ways that were not cooperative and ways that were considered unhelpful by the other contributors, then the result would likely have been that nobody would have made new responses to old boiler-plate critiques. However, edit wars ensued in a climate wherein communication had already proven to be thoroughly road-blocked.

So here we are. We can go nowhere until somebody helps Zen-master untie the knot. Six or more of us have tried. So far, anybody who has tried to straighten things out has been viewed as not being neutral. Zen-master seems to see malice behind almost everything. Who would he trust? P0M 16:30, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment by User:Rikurzhen (Rikurzhen)
I believe the Zen Master (ZM) issue has been described fully by commenters above. I will try to summarize as I see it. Most of the incidents I'm describing are archived: Talk:Race and intelligence/Archive 9 (inherent language bias). I copied some relevant sections here: Requests_for_arbitration/Zen-master/Evidence

--Rikurzhen 20:00, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * ZM has an ostensibly unique POV about this subject, which he summarized himself as: Critics, including myself, accuse the intelligence research field of errantly implying, at a fundamental level, that "race" is the cause for the "intelligence" disparity because of the one sided way they present the issue.
 * ZM himself is the only critic that I know of who makes this claim.
 * Neither ZM, nor any other editor, has been able to substantiate this POV with citations. This is not to say that sharply critical POVs of race and intelligence research do not exist (e.g. Race_and_intelligence describes many). However, none of these POVs correspond with ZM's POV.
 * It is understandable that a first-time editor may doubt that the article is factually accurate or unbiased because the understanding of this topic among the public and public intellecutals is significantly different than the understanding of experts (this fact is described in detail in Snyderman and Rothman, 1988, The IQ Controversy). However, many previous editors with these concerns have come to understand the problem and either moved on or jumped in to help. ZM has not.
 * ZM has been unable or unwilling to accept that his POV is unique, despite many attempts (some described above) to explain that his thinking is unique, and so cannot be included in the article.
 * By trying to add his POV to the article, I maintain that ZM is violating WP:NOR (and also WP:NPOV).
 * Edit wars with ZM resulted when he took his ideas from the talk page to the article.
 * ZM has personally attacked (AFAIK) everyone who has tried to talk with him.
 * To be fair, I can see how someone who believes as ZM does about this topic would think that anyone who disagreed with him was racist. While many of his personal attacks have been direct, others have been implicit; yet the meaning of each is clear.
 * Yet, he has been unwilling to give us the courtesy of taking our word that we are well-meaning people. Likewise, he has refused to accept the existence of a large, healthy scholarly process in the world as evidence that his accusations of a conspiracy of racists is implausible and unhelpful to work in the article.
 * His personal attacks were wholly disruptive and severely affected our ability to edit/discuss the article. In the ensuing mess, progress towards an FAC has been all but lost.
 * ZM seems incapable of contributing to this article without (1) injecting his unique, personal POV and (2) making personal attacks (explicit or implicit) against other editors

Comment by User:Ed Poor (Uncle Ed)
As I recall, Zen Master responded to my requests to tone down the language in an admirable, not to say inimitably cooperative way. He is to be congratulated for elevating the level of civility re: this hot-button topic.

I do not see ZM as pushing any POV in the article, but rather persistently raising awareness of one particular idea on the talk page: that the relation between race and intelligence could or might be other than a simple cause and effect one. And he has been requesting that this POV be accorded some mention in the article.

Whether this view is so "marginal" as to necessitate its exclusion from the article might be a matter for RFC (or possible Mediation). But pursuant to a recent e-mail I got from Jimbo (about a similar issue) I would say that NPOV policy is best served by mentioning disparate points of view - rather than by excluding them. There would be no race and intelligence article if it were beyond doubt that blacks are stupid - it would simply be a paragraph tucked into a psychology or anthropology article, listed as a matter of fact.

The question of what relation intelligence has to "race" touches on wide-ranging issues of social policy which simply refuse to go away. Quotas for admissions, grading and degree-granting (at university) and hiring and promotion (at work); the so-called "affirmative action" approach; that much-discussed book The Bell Curve; and the whole nature-nurture controversy are all intimately related.

I think ZM has done a fairly good job of bringing to our attention the problems with the article, and I see no reason for an injunctions to squash or quell the "boy who said the Emperor has no clothes" (with apologies to both HC Anderson and Zen-Master). Uncle Ed 16:16, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (6/0/0/0)

 * Accept. →Raul654 July 3, 2005 07:50 (UTC)
 * Accept. Fred Bauder July 4, 2005 17:32 (UTC)
 * Accept. ➥the Epopt 23:11, 9 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. sannse (talk) 16:23, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. James F. (talk) 18:36, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Accept. Neutralitytalk 07:10, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

= Final decision =

All numbering based on /Proposed decision (vote counts and comments are there as well)

5 is the majority in this case? zen master T 16:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * No, 4 votes is a majority in this case. There were 5 inactive Arbitrators, leaving only 7, of whom 2 implicitly abstained.
 * James F. (talk) 16:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

No personal attacks
1) Personal attacks on other users are unacceptable, see No personal attacks

 * Passed 5 to 0 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Assume good faith
2) Wikipedia editors are required to be courteous to other users and to assume good faith on the part of other users.

 * Passed 5 to 0 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Banning for disruptive behavior
3) A Wikipedia user may be banned from editing an article where their activities have been disruptive.

 * ''Passed 5 to 0 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Personal attacks by Zen-master
1) has made a number of personal attacks on the other editors of race and intelligence, been discourteous and has assumed bad faith on their part   . He also attacks books and scholars which deal with the subject matter such as The Bell Curve.

 * Passed 4 to 1 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Disruptive edits
2) has edited race and intelligence in a disruptive manner both in the article itself and on related pages such as Talk:Race and intelligence . While he complains regarding improper framing of the article, he cites references which frame the subject in terms of a struggle between "Fascism" and "Communism".

 * Passed 4 to 1 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Zen-master placed on probation
1) is placed on probation for one year, and during that time may be banned from any article if, in the opinion of any administrator, his editing is disruptive. This may include the talk pages of such articles. See Probation.

 * Passed 4 to 1 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Modified from specific to race and intelligence to all articles, by order.
 * James F. (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Which arbcom members approved this? What was their rationale and evidence? I request an appeal to the full arbitration committee. zen master T 20:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Votes by arbitrators

 * Extend to all articles Fred Bauder 07:34, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extend to all articles Kelly Martin (talk) 19:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extend to all articles Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:18, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extend to all articles Raul654 17:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extend to all articles ➥the Epopt 21:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Extend to all articles. James F. (talk) 00:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Recuse. Jayjg (talk) 19:46, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Zen-master banned
2) is banned for one week for personal attacks.

 * Passed 4 to 1 at 16:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Zen-master banned for a year
3) For continued bad behaviour since the resolution of this case, Zen-master is banned for one year.

 * ''Passed 6 to 1 at 23:43, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Impositions of a ban under the probation remedy

 * Zen-master is banned from editing the article namespace for Race and intelligence from 00:48, 13 November 2005 (UTC) to 00:48, 27 November 2005 (UTC). --Ryan Delaney talk 04:21, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

 * But for what incident, and how was I "disruptive"? If an in good faith dispute over an article exists how can adding the {npov} template to it possibly be a disruption? A quick look at the Talk:race and intelligence page will show the article and area of research are fundamentally disputed on numerous points. Also, Fred Baurer already pointed out the probation policy has specific requirements that don't appear to have even been attempted in this case: (From Probation) "A ban may be imposed only for good cause which shall be documented in a section set aside for that purpose in the arbitration case. Banning without good cause or in bad faith shall be grounds for censure, restriction, or removal of administrative access". zen master T 04:52, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

 * He could have been more specific regarding the reason. Fred Bauder 12:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

 * If you mean "more" from the starting point of 0 then yes, Ryan hasn't offered any specifics as to what constitutes a disruption in his interpretation. Removing an {npov} template when an in good faith dispute exists violates various wikipedia policies on its own. zen master T 13:19, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

 * As requested by Fred Bauder, this is my rationale for the ban: For disruptive edits    despite warnings . These edits were disruptive because they constituted a unilateral addition of content irrespective of the views of other editors. The totallydisputed template represented a dispute advanced only by Zen-master and no other editor. His stubborn insistence on this kind of content change is the sort of disruptive editing that his RFAr was intended to prevent. --Ryan Delaney talk 19:38, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that we disagree over the content of race and intelligence, when such disagreements arise a template is added at the top of the article signifying a dispute. This is basic NPOV policy. There are other editors on the talk page that dispute that article and area of research. IQ testing is itself fundamentally disputed, the word "score" is obviously loaded and should be disallowed. zen master T

 * I think probation is working as intended in this instance. Fred Bauder 20:11, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * How is it working? The NPOV policy should trump probation, when an in good faith dispute exists the {npov} template is added to the article. Your are (perhaps unwittingly) allowing Ryan Delaney and others to succeed in denying criticism against what appears to be a racism inducing article. The views of these "other editors" appear to support (perhaps unwittingly) its racist inducing method of presentation, how is that ok? At the very least the article's method of presentation is completely unscientific. zen master T 20:48, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

 * As indicated on WP:ANI, I have banned Zen-master from Conspiracy theory for the remainder of 2005, for revert warring and going against consensus regarding the direction of the article. Radiant_ >|< 18:05, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I have banned Zen-master from User Bill of Rights for disruptive edits (multiple removals of the rejected tag) until 13 January 2006 (per terms of his probation). This ban has been listed on WP:AN. Carbonite | Talk 15:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It was disruptive and against the spirit of wikipedia to put the {rejected} tag in a proposal that is actively receiving votes, debate and discussion. FYI, "multiple" = 2. At least 2 other editors on Wikipedia talk:User Bill of Rights have disagreed with Carbonite's page ban and his interpretation of "disruptive". zen master T 16:50, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Three different editors (myself, Ambi, and Radiant) added the rejected tag. You reverted each time , which is disruptive. The ban is only for two weeks and you're still allowed to edit the talk page. The proposal has clearly been rejected, despite what the supporters of the proposal believe. We have polls to determine consensus and once the outcome is clear, the poll is no longer needed. Carbonite | Talk 16:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * One of the reverts you cite is from Dec 25th, so 3 reverts in 4 days is hardly "disruptive". It is exponentially more disruptive to prematurely archive something that should be left open. Just because polling/voting is going a certain way doesn't mean the polling station should close early. Perhaps you are worried if more or a critical mass of users are made aware of User Bill of Rights your side would lose? Also, your definition of "consensus" has been corrupted, it does not mean majority. The point is to encourage discussion, consistency and debate, the proposers of the User Bill of Rights have valid concerns. zen master T 17:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

 * User Bill of Rights has been moved to User prerogatives. Since Benjamin Gatti, in a fit of Wikilawyering, suggested this means Zen-master can once again edit the page in spite of Carbonite's ban, I have simply banned Zen-master from User prerogatives until 13 January 2006, for the exact same reasoning as Carbonite's. Radiant_ >|< 23:45, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

 * To put an end to these fruitless one-sided discussions, and by his ArbCom probation, Zen-master is hereby banned from discussing, or commenting on, article titles on any page in the Wikipedia namespace, and is requested to use the relevant talk pages instead. Additionally, Zen-master is hereby banned from starting polls or votes related to article titles on any page in the Wikipedia_talk namespace, and is requested to use consensual discussion instead. Both bans have a duration of one month. Radiant_ >|< 22:09, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Counteracting your apparent censorship of a proposal should not be a crime. Where in the probation policy is there any justification for restricting what an editor can do on the discussion page (as far being banned from starting polls or votes)? A very serious pattern is emerging, I am on probation for basically criticizing the presumption inducing dichotomy and unscientific presentation method in the race and intelligence article and now you are effectively doing the same because of my Conspiracy theory titles proposal? What is going on here? Feel free to disagree with my interpretation and criticism but don't censor it. zen master T 22:18, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Zen-master has been blocked (for a second time) for 48 hours for violating your ban regarding discussion of article titles in the Wikipedia namespace. See . Since this is the second violation of this ban, the block length is 48 hours instead of 24. Carbonite | Talk 12:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)


text:
Flowers in the Attic

Flowers in the Attic is a 1979 Gothic novel by V. C. Andrews. It is the first book in the Dollanganger series, and was followed by Petals on the Wind, If There Be Thorns, Seeds of Yesterday, Garden of Shadows, Christopher's Diary: Secrets of Foxworth, Christopher's Diary: Echoes of Dollanganger, and Christopher's Diary: Secret Brother. The novel is written in the first person, from the point of view of Cathy Dollanganger. It was twice adapted into films in 1987 and 2014. The book was extremely popular, selling over 40 million copies world wide.

Plot
In 1957, the Dollanganger family—father Christopher, mother Corrine, 14-year-old Chris, 12-year-old Cathy and 5-year-old twins Carrie and Cory—live an idyllic life in Gladstone, Pennsylvania, until Christopher Sr. is killed in a car accident, leaving Corinne in debt with no means to support her children.

On the verge of their home being foreclosed, Corrine reveals to the children that as a young woman, her marriage to Christopher so offended her multimillionaire father Malcolm Foxworth that he disinherited her. Now, the elderly Malcolm is dying of heart disease and Corrine intends to return to her childhood home of Foxworth Hall in Virginia to win back his affection in time to be reinstated into his will. Because Malcolm is unaware that Corrine had children by her marriage to Christopher, the children must hide in a secluded upstairs room of the enormous Foxworth Hall until Corrine can break the news to her father. She assures the children that they will only be in the room for a few days.

At Foxworth Hall, Corrine’s mother (called only "the grandmother") locks the children in a bedroom connected to the house's large attic. The grandmother forces Corrine to reveal to her children that the reason for her disinheritance was that Christopher Sr. was Malcolm's younger half-brother, thus Corrine's half-uncle, and that the children are the products of incest. The grandmother believes the children are "the Devil's spawn" and is obsessed with the idea of incest, forbidding all contact between opposite sexes, while prohibiting the children from making noise or opening the room's windows. Only in the attic are they free to play.

Cathy and Chris attempt to make the best of the situation by decorating the attic with paper flowers to create an imaginary garden for the twins. The grandmother comes every morning with a picnic basket filled with the day's food and interrogates the children about their modesty and piety, questions the children are too innocent to fully understand. Initially, Corrine visits several times per day, bringing toys and gifts, but over time her visits grow sporadic. After months have passed, Cathy and Chris confront her, as she promised they would be freed in only a few days. Corrine finally confesses that they must remain in the room until their grandfather dies.

A year later, Cathy and Chris have both entered puberty, while the twins are stunted from inadequate nutrition and lack of sunlight. With no other outlets, Cathy and Chris develop a romantic and sexual attraction toward each other, though they do their best to deny their feelings. The grandmother catches Chris staring at a half-dressed Cathy and punishes the children by cutting off their food supply for over two weeks, while they pray their mother will reappear in time to save them. On the verge of starvation, Cathy and Chris decide to escape with the twins to find help. Before they can go through, the grandmother begins bringing food again, including a rare treat of powdered-sugar doughnuts. Soon afterwards, all the children begin to complain of constant minor illness.

Another year passes. After an absence of several months, Corrine visits the children, explaining that she had been on a European honeymoon with her new husband, Bart Winslow. Cathy and Chris are furious, but fear Corrine will abandon them permanently if they confront her. Realizing that the twins' health is declining, Cathy and Chris decide to escape. Chris creates a wooden skeleton key. Over the next several months, he and Cathy take turns slipping downstairs to their mother's suite to steal cash and jewelry to fund their lives outside. One night, Cathy discovers her sleeping stepfather and kisses him. When Chris learns of the kiss, he rapes Cathy in a fit of jealousy and rage. Afterwards, he is overcome with remorse, while Cathy feels guilty and conflicted about the act due to her love for Chris.

One of the twins, Cory, becomes deathly ill. Cathy begs Corrine to take him to a hospital, but Corrine hesitates. Cathy, enraged, tells her that if she does not act to save Cory's life, Cathy will reveal their existence to the grandfather. Corrine finally takes Cory away but returns the following morning to inform the children that he died of pneumonia. The children are devastated, with Cathy left wondering if Cory's death is God's punishment for her sexual assault from Chris.

Chris resumes stealing from their mother's rooms, only to discover Corrine and Bart have left Foxworth Hall permanently. Eavesdropping on the servants, Chris learns their grandfather died a year ago and that the grandmother has been leaving food contaminated with rat poison in the attic due to a "mouse infestation". He connects this with the doughnuts they are being fed and realizes Cory died of arsenic poisoning.

The three remaining children finally leave Foxworth Hall to catch a train to Florida. At the station, Chris reveals he discovered Corrine's inheritance is conditional upon her having no children from her first marriage, and she, rather than the grandmother, was the one who most likely poisoned them. Chris and Cathy decide against contacting the authorities, as their main concern is to stay together, but Cathy vows that one day she will make Corrine pay for her crimes.

Characters

 * Catherine Leigh "Cathy" Dollanganger: The protagonist and narrator of the novel, Cathy is the second child and older daughter of Christopher and Corrine. She becomes an accomplished ballerina and later a novelist. During their time in the attic, she becomes romantically and sexually attracted to Chris, her brother, and then she falls in love with him.
 * Christopher Garland "Chris" Dollanganger, Jr.: The older son and oldest child of Christopher and Corrine, Chris is the older brother of Cathy, Cory, and Carrie. He is an overachiever and later becomes a doctor. During their time in the attic, he becomes romantically and sexually attracted to Cathy, his sister, and then he falls in love with her.
 * Cory Dollanganger: The twin brother of Carrie and younger brother of Cathy and Chris. The "quiet one" of the twins, Cory is introverted, but musically talented. He becomes ill during their time in the attic and dies from arsenic poisoning at the hands of his mother.
 * Carrie Dollanganger: The twin sister to Cory and the younger sister of Cathy and Chris, prior to Cory's death, she is a girly girl, but after Cory dies, she refuses to speak for months.
 * Corrine Dollanganger (née Foxworth): The mother of Chris, Cathy, Cory, and Carrie and widow of Christopher Dollanganger, she eventually becomes an antagonist in the story when she tries to kill her children to gain her father's inheritance. She marries her father's attorney, Bart Winslow, later on, and loses interest in her children and late husband.
 * Bartholomew "Bart" Winslow: The second husband of Corrine, he is a trophy husband who marries her, thinking that she does not have any children. Cathy is shocked to discover that he is eight years younger than Corinne.
 * Olivia Foxworth (née Winfield): The wife of Malcolm Foxworth, she is the grandmother of the Dollanganger children and a cousin of John Amos. Olivia and Malcolm are co-antagonists in this book.
 * Malcolm Neal Foxworth: The father of Corinne and grandfather of the Dollanganger children, he is the husband of Olivia. He is described both as having a heart condition and as heartless. He dies during the story, though Chris and Cathy do not learn this until the end. He was also the older half-brother of the children's father.
 * Christopher Dollanganger, Sr.: Corrine's first husband, he is the father of the children. He was Malcolm's younger half-brother, making him Corinne's half-uncle. He is described as a wonderful father who could not bear to be separated from his children for longer than five days. He is killed in a car accident on his birthday at the beginning of the book.
 * John Amos: A butler to the Foxworth family, he is Olivia's cousin. Chris overhears horrible information from him during one of Chris' expeditions to steal from his mother.

Reception
A review in The Washington Post when the book was released described the book as “deranged swill” that “may well be the worst book I have ever read”. The retrospective in The Guardian agreed that it is deranged, but called it "utterly compelling."

School library bannings
The depiction of incest between an adolescent brother and sister in the novel has led to its being banned in certain areas at different times. Chariho High School in Rhode Island removed it because it contained "offensive passages concerning incest and sexual intercourse." In 1994, it was removed from the Oconee County, Georgia, school libraries due to "the filthiness of the material."

Awards
In 1993, Flowers in the Attic was awarded the Secondary BILBY Award. In 2003, the book was listed on the BBC's The Big Read poll of the UK's 200 "best-loved novels."

Adaptations
In 1987, the book was adapted into a film of the same name, starring Louise Fletcher, Victoria Tennant, Kristy Swanson, and Jeb Stuart Adams, and directed by Jeffrey Bloom.

A second adaptation was released on January 18, 2014, on Lifetime, starring Heather Graham as Corrine and Ellen Burstyn as the grandmother, with Kiernan Shipka as Cathy, Mason Dye as Christopher, and directed by Deborah Chow. The film received mixed reviews, but critics praised Ellen Burstyn's performance.

The book was adapted into a stage play by V. C. Andrews's ghostwriter, Andrew Neiderman, in the form of an e-book; it was published by Pocket Star. The stage play was released in October 2014 and is 80 pages long. In August 2015, the stage play received its world premiere production in New Orleans. The play, which received positive reviews, was produced by See 'Em On Stage: A Production Company and was directed by Christopher Bentivegna.

In 2022, the Lifetime network released a television limited series called Flowers in the Attic: The Origin, starring Kelsey Grammer and Kate Mulgrew. The four-episode miniseries is a prequel that focuses on Olivia Foxworth, and is largely based on Garden of Shadows, the fifth novel of the Dollanganger series.

Historical basis
In her pitch letter to her publisher, Andrews claimed that the story behind the novel was "not truly fiction," leading to long-standing rumors that the novel may have been based on true events. For many years, no evidence was found to support this claim, and the book was passed off as fiction. Nonetheless, the official V. C. Andrews website claims to have contacted one of Andrews' relatives. This unidentified relative claimed Flowers in the Attic was loosely based on a faintly similar account. While at the "University of Virginia hospital for treatment...she developed a crush on her young doctor. He and his siblings had been locked away in the attic for over six years to preserve the family wealth."

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

title: Flowers in the Attic


text:
Barry Miller (actor)

Barry Miller (born February 6, 1958) is an American actor. He won Broadway's 1985 Tony Award as Best Actor (Featured Role - Play) for his performance in Biloxi Blues.

Early life
Miller was born at Cedars of Lebanon Hospital in Los Angeles, California to Sidney Miller, an actor, director, and writer, and Iris Burton, an agent. His former stepmother is actress Dorothy Green. He attended Bancroft Junior High School, in Hollywood, and Fairfax High School.

Career
In addition to Biloxi Blues, Miller acted on Broadway in Crazy He Calls Me (1992).

He had prominent roles in Saturday Night Fever, Fame, and Peggy Sue Got Married.

One of his most major film roles was playing Reuven Malter in 1981's The Chosen.

Filmography

 * The Waltons (1973) (TV) - Craska
 * Brock's Last Case (1973) (TV movie) - Staats
 * Shazam! (1974-1975) (TV) - Mike
 * Joe and Sons (1975-1976) (TV series) - Mark Vitale
 * Lepke (1975) - Young Lepke
 * Adam-12 (1975) (TV) - Tom Bell
 * The Secrets of Isis (1976) (TV)
 * Having Babies (1976) (TV) - Kenneth McNamara
 * The Death of Richie (1977) (TV) - Domenic
 * Szysznyk (1977) (TV) - Fortwengler
 * Saturday Night Fever (1977) - Bobby C.
 * Kojak (1977) (TV) - Billy Sherback
 * Wonder Woman (1979) (TV) - Barney
 * Voices (1979) - Raymond Rothman
 * Fame (1980) - Ralph
 * The Chosen (1981) - Reuven Malter
 * King of America (1982) (TV)
 * The Roommate (1985) (TV)
 * The Journey of Natty Gann (1985) - Parker
 * Peggy Sue Got Married (1986) - Richard Norvik
 * Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8 (1987) (TV movie) - Jerry Rubin
 * The Sicilian (1987) - Dr. Nattore
 * The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) - Jeroboam
 * Love at Large (1990) - Marty
 * Equal Justice (1990) (TV) - Pete 'Briggs' Brigman
 * The Pickle (1993) - Ronnie Liebowitz
 * Love Affair (1994) - Robert Crosley
 * NYPD Blue (1994) (TV)
 * The Practice (1997) (TV) - Douglas Colson
 * Flawless (1999) - Leonard Wilcox
 * Shortcut to Happiness (2007) - Mike Weiss

title: Barry Miller (actor)


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zen-master/Proposed decision

all proposed

Arbitrators should vote for or against each point or abstain.
 * Only items that receive a majority "support" vote will be passed.
 * Items that receive a majority "oppose" vote will be formally rejected.
 * Items that do not receive a majority "support" or "oppose" vote will be open to possible amendment by any Arbitrator if he so chooses. After the amendment process is complete, the item will be voted on one last time.

Conditional votes for or against and abstentions should be explained by the Arbitrator before or after his/her time-stamped signature. For example, an Arbitrator can state that she/he would only favor a particular remedy based on whether or not another remedy/remedies were passed.

On this case, no Arbitrators are recused and 5 are inactive, so 4 votes are a majority.

Proposed wording to be modified by Arbitrators and then voted on. Non-Arbitrators may comment on the talk page.
 * For all items:

Motions and requests by the parties
Place those on the discussion page.

Proposed temporary injunctions
Four net "support" votes needed to pass (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support") 24 hours from the first vote is normally the fastest an injunction will be imposed.

Template
1)

{text of proposed orders}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

=Proposed final decision=

Template
1) {text of proposed principle}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

No personal attacks
1) Personal attacks on other users are unacceptable, see No personal attacks

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 16:13, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 00:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Assume good faith
2) Wikipedia editors are required to be courteous to other users and to assume good faith on the part of other users.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 16:13, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 00:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Banning for disruptive behavior
3) A Wikipedia user may be banned from editing an article where their activities have been disruptive.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 16:13, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutralitytalk 00:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Template
1) {text of proposed finding of fact}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Personal attacks by Zen-master
1) has made a number of personal attacks on the other editors of race and intelligence, been discourteous and has assumed bad faith on their part   . He also attacks books and scholars which deal with the subject matter such as The Bell Curve.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 16:29, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * Those links prove nothing. Zen-master has argued forcefully and reasonable for his position, using links and statements of fact. He may be aggressive, but I see little to support this finding. Neutralitytalk 03:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Disruptive edits
2. has edited race and intelligence in a disruptive manner both in the article itself and on related pages such as Talk:Race and intelligence. While he complains regarding improper framing of the article, he cites references which frame the subject in terms of a struggle between "Fascism" and "Communism".

 * Support:
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Fred Bauder 11:40, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * See above. Neutralitytalk 00:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Proposed remedies
Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

Template
1) {text of proposed remedy}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

Zen-master placed on probation
1) is placed on probation for one year, and during that time may be banned from any article which relates to race and intelligence if in the opinion of any administrator his editing is disruptive. This may include the talk page of race and intelligence, see Probation.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 16:36, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * Disruptive is rather nebulous for this case. Neutralitytalk 00:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Zen-master banned
1) is banned for one week for personal attacks.

 * Support:
 * Fred Bauder 17:59, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * ➥the Epopt 22:27, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * James F. (talk) 15:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 03:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Oppose:
 * No. Neutralitytalk 03:37, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Abstain:

Template
1) {text of proposed enforcement}

 * Support:

 * Oppose:

 * Abstain:

=Discussion by Arbitrators=

Motion to close
Four net "support" votes needed to close case (each "oppose" vote subtracts a "support") 24 hours from the first motion is normally the fastest a case will close.

 * I think we are done Fred Bauder 12:45, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur ➥the Epopt 13:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * →Raul654 15:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yup. James F. (talk) 15:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, closed. James F. (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Kaleici

Vote for Deletion
This article survived a Vote for Deletion. Its content was merged and the article then redirected. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 19:10, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kaleici


text:
Mycale

Mycale also Mykale and Mykali (Μυκάλη, Mykálē), called Samsun Dağı and Dilek Dağı (Dilek Peninsula) in modern Turkey, is a mountain on the west coast of central Anatolia in Turkey, north of the mouth of the Maeander and divided from the Greek island of Samos by the 1.6 km wide Mycale Strait. The mountain forms a ridge, terminating in what was known anciently as the Trogilium promontory (Ancient Greek Τρωγίλιον or Τρωγύλιον). There are several beaches on the north shore ranging from sand to pebbles. The south flank is mainly escarpment.

In the Late Bronze Age, it may have been known under the Hittite name Arrinnanda.

In classical Greece nearly the entire ridge was a promontory enclosed by the Aegean Sea. Geopolitically it was part of Ionia with Priene placed on the coast on the south flank of the mountain and Miletus on the coast opposite to the south across the deep embayment into which the Maeander River drained. Somewhat further north was Ephesus.

The ruins of the first two Ionian cities mentioned with their harbor facilities remain but today are several miles inland overlooking instead a rich agricultural plain and delta parkland created by deposition of sediments from the river, which continues to form the geological feature named after it, maeanders. The end of the former bay remains as a lake, Çamiçi Gölü (Lake Bafa). Samsun Daği, or Mycale, still has a promontory.

The entire ridge was designated as a national park in 1966; Dilek Yarimadisi Milli Parki ("Dilek Peninsula National Park") has 109.85 km2, which is partly accessible to the public. The remainder is a military reservation. The park's isolation has encouraged the return of the native ecology, which is 60% maquis shrubland. It is a refuge for species that used to be more abundant in the region.

Geophysics
Western Turkey is mainly fault-block terrain, with steep-sided ridges running east–west and rivers in the rifts. The source of the faulting is the closing of Tethys Sea and the collision of the African and Arabian plates with the Eurasian plate. The smaller Turkish and Aegean plates are being pushed together, generating ridges in Turkey. This orogenic belt was in place by 1.6 mya and continues to be a hot spot of earthquakes and volcanoes.

Mount Mycale is part of a larger ridge, which continues in Samos on the other side of the Samos Strait, and to the northeast in the Aydin Dağlari ("Aydin Mountains"), ancient Messogis range, on the other side of low hills and passes. The entire block of mountains around the Menderes (Maeander) River is known as the Menderes Massif.

Mycale is scored transversely by numerous ravines through which sources drain. The biggest ravine is Oluk Gorge, with cliffs 200 m high. The main permanent streams are the Bal Deresi, the Sarap Dami and the Oluk Dereleri. The ample water supply supports a verdant maquis.

The rock is primarily metamorphic: marble and limestone formed from rocks originating in the Mesozoic, crystalline schists formed from rocks originating in the Palaeozoic and conglomerates of the Cenozoic. The renowned builders and sculptors of Ionia made full use of these materials for their major works.

Ecology
The ridge and its environs offer a number of different ecologies. The crest is a sharp divide between the xerophytic southern slopes and the forested northern slopes, with 66.24 km2 of maquis and 35.74 km2 of mixed pine. Around the base of the promontory is a maritime environment.

The maquis vegetation includes Pistacia lentiscus; Laurus nobilis; Quercus ilex, Q. frainetto and Q. ithaburensis; Phillyrea latifolia; Ceratonia siliqua; Olea europaea; Rubus fruticosus; Myrtus communis; Smilax; Jasminum fruticans; Vitis vinifera; Lathyrus grandiflorus; Erica arborea, and Juncus on the slopes of the north. In moister areas are to be found Nerium oleander, Platanus orientalis, Fraxinus ornus, Laurus nobilis, Cupressus sempervirens and Rubus fruticosus.

The mixed pine forest goes up to 700 m. Its major plant species are Pinus brutia, Juniperus phoenicea, with broad-leaved trees and shrubs: Ulmus campestris, Acer sempervirens, Fraxinus ornus, Castanea sativa, Tilia platyphyllos, Sorbus torminalis, Viburnum tinus, Pyrus eleagrifolia, and Prunus dulcis.

Some mammals native to the region are Sus scrofa, Vulpes vulpes, Hystrix cristata, Canis aureus, Canis lupus, Martes martes, Lynx lynx, Felis sylvestris, Ursus arctos, Meles meles, Lepus, Erinaceus europaeus, and Sciurus. Migrants are Caracal caracal and Panthera pardus.

Some birds are Columba livia, Alectoris graeca, Perdix perdix, Coturnix coturnix, Scolopax rusticola, Turdus merula, Turdus pilaris, Oriolus oriolus, Merops apiaster, eagles, vultures, Corvus corax, Pica pica, and Sturnus vulgaris.

Monachus monachus breeds in caves around the shores of Mycale. They and other marine predators (including man) feed on Planiliza, Pagellus, Dentex vulgaris and Thunnus thynnus.

Earliest references
Mycale, Miletus and the Maeander appear in the Trojan Battle Order of the Iliad, where they are populated by Carians. "The steep heights of Mycale" and Miletus are also in the Hymn to Apollo, where Leto, pregnant with Apollo, an especially Ionian god, travels about the Aegean looking for a home for her son, and settles on Delos, the major Ionian political, religious and cultural center of Classical Greece.

A similar metaphor is to be found in the centuries-later Hymn to Delos of Callimachus, in which Delos, a swimming island, visits various places in the Aegean, including Parthenia, "Maiden's Isle" (Samos), where it is entertained by the nymphs of Mycalessos. Just as Parthenia is the previous name of Samos so the reader is to understand Mycalessos as the previous name of Mycale. On being chosen as the birthplace of Apollo, Delos becomes fixed in the sea.

Hittite records of the Late Bronze Age. In Hitti language, Apasa (Ephesus), the capital of a state called Arzawa, in which also was Karkisha in (Caria) and Millawanda (Miletus). In the Linear B script tablets the region is called A-swi-ja (Asia). Documents at Pylos, Thebes and Knossos identify female textile workers and seamstresses (raptria) in servitude of Mi-ra-ti-ja, *Milātiai, "Milesians". The regions from which they came were centers of Mycenaean civilization although the languages they spoke was an early Greek-Mycenaean language and written in Linear B, although some support that was an unknown.

The state of Melia
After the Late Bronze Age the entire Aegean region entered a historical period termed the Greek Dark Ages. Archaeologically it was known as the Proto-geometric and Geometric Periods, which did not belong to any one ethnic group. This is the time to which heavy Ionic migration from mainland Greece to the coast of Ionia and the emergence of Delos as an Ionian center is believed to apply. These events were over at the start of the brilliant renaissance of the Orientalizing Period in which Ionia played a cardinal role.

During this rise to prominence twelve cities were settled or resettled and emerged as Ionia speaking varieties of Ionic Greek. Vitruvius, however, says there were thirteen, the extra state being Melite, which "... as a punishment of the arrogance of its citizens was detached from the other states in a war levied pursuant to the directions of a general council (communi consilio); and in its place ... the city of Smyrna was admitted into the number of Ionian states (inter Ionas est recepta)." There is no other mention of Melite anywhere but two fragments of Hecataeus say that Melia was a city of Caria and an inscription from Priene confirms that there had been a "Meliac War" against a state located between Priene and Samos; i.e., on Mycale.

The inscription records the result of an arbitration between Priene and Samos by jurors from Rhodes. Both litigants claimed that Carium, the fortified settlement of Melia, and Dryussa, another settlement, had been distributed to them at the conclusion of the Meliac War, when the Carians were expelled. Being on the Samian side of the crest Melia had been resettled mainly by Samians and for this reason they had won a similar case brought before Lysimachus of Macedon a century earlier. That case is mentioned in an earlier inscription from Priene.

Priene had now reopened the case arguing that their sale of plots from the land demonstrated their continuous ownership of it except for a brief period when an invasion of the Cimmerians under Lygdamis forced temporary Greek evacuation of the region (about 650 BC). The Samians used a passage from the now missing History of Maeandrius of Miletus to support their claim. The jury found that Maeandrius was not authentic and reversed the earlier decision.

Panionium
The Melians had named their capital Carium, "of Caria" as a Greek word. Considering that it was placed in Ionia, the choice of name suggests a political statement of some sort, although the word may have had a different meaning in the Carian language, now lost except for a few dozen words. The Ionians leagued together to defeat it and continued the league, building a capital they called Panionium, "of all the Ionians" next to the former Carium. It rose to prominence while the Ionian confederacy was sovereign, became a memory when Ionia was incorporated into other states and empires and finally was lost altogether. The ancient writers remembered that it had been on the north side of the mountain, across the ridge from Priene.

After a few false identifications in modern times, the ruins of Melia and the Panionium were discovered in 2004 on Dilek Daglari, a smaller peak of Mycale, 15 km to the north of Priene at an elevation of 750 m. The Carium must be the early 7th century BC town surrounded by a triangular wall in places as thick as 3 m.

The floruit was the early 7th, but sherds have been found there from as early as the Protogeometric period. Coldstream characterizes the burial structures as of "a considerable Carian substrate". The culture was not entirely Carian; the Ionians continued the worship of Poseidon Heliconius there, which Strabo says came from Helike in Peloponnesian Achaea. This event must have been during the Ionian colonization. Melia therefore was a renegade Ionian state.

The temple believed to the Panionium was constructed next to the Carium about 540 BC. It took over the worship of Poseidon Heliconius, served as the meeting place of the Ionian League, and was the site of the religious festival and games (panegyris) called the Panionia. The construction of this temple is a terminus post quem for the existence of the Ionian League, which as a constituted body had a name, the koinon Iōnōn ("common thing of the Ionians"), a synedrion ("place to sit down together") and a boulē ("council").

Whether this body existed before the Meliac War is uncertain. Vitruvius' commune consilium seems to translate koinon. Some analysts have postulated an association as early as 800 BC but whether formally constituted remains unknown. There is no sign of it yet on Mycale unless Carium had in fact been it.

Battle of Mycale
In 479 BC, Mycale was the site of one of the two major battles that ended the second Persian invasion of Greece, during the Greco-Persian Wars. Under the leadership of the Spartan Leotychides, the Greek fleet defeated the Persian fleet and army. According to Herodotus, the battle occurred the same day as the Greek victory at Plataea.

title: Mycale


text:
1821 in archaeology

The year 1821 in archaeology involved some significant events.

Explorations

 * October - John Gardner Wilkinson begins a twelve-year stay in Egypt, surveying historical sites.

Finds

 * 'Gallagh Man', an Iron Age bog body, is found in County Galway, Ireland.

Miscellaneous

 * "Egyptian Hall" in London displays artifacts from Ancient Egypt brought to the United Kingdom by Giovanni Battista Belzoni. The Philae obelisk is landed in England in December.
 * While not specifically the year 1821, this time period is when one of the most significant categorical discoveries of archaeology was named. Christian Thomsen, a Danish archaeologist, developed the three age system to date objects in museums. These three ages were the "Stone Age," "Bronze Age," and "Iron Age."
 * While not specifically the year 1821, this time period is when one of the most significant findings regarding time and dating archaeological findings was discovered. Boucher de Perthes established a much deeper sense of time than what James Usher had previously established. Perthes determined that the world was significantly older than 4004 BC and thus gave archaeology a deeper, more realistic time frame to work with.

Births

 * June 21, 1821- The birth of Ephraim George Squier, co-author of "Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley" along with Edwin Hamilton Davis.

title: 1821 in archaeology


text:
User talk:ThinkingInBinary

Hello, world! Welcome to ThinkingInBinary's talk page!

Welcome to Wikipedia
Hi ThinkingInBinary, sorry that I didn't explain things better, I didn't realize you were a new editor. If you have any questions about the policies feel free to drop by my talk page and we can discuss things in more detail. Hope I haven't gotten off on the wrong foot!!!. I would love to work with you to improve the article (once the inappropriate content has been removed). Kaldari 19:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * One thing you could add to the article is information about any notable alumni that have attended the school, as this is usually easy to verify from sites about the famous person. Has the school ever had any championship sports teams or won any major awards? Anything that makes the school unique would be useful to have in the article (assuming of course, its verifiable). Kaldari 23:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW, it may be useful to know that there is a long listory of controversy on Wikipedia surrounding school articles. In the old days, most articles on schools (besides colleges) were just deleted unless they were quite famous, as most people did not think they belonged in an encyclopedia. Gradually, however, Wikipedia has become more inclusionist and the tolerance for school articles is actually quite high now. School articles are still something of a sore spot, however, as few school articles are well written or completely up to Wikipedia guidelines as they tend to be written by people associated with the schools rather than impartial 3rd party editors. There are exceptions, however. Check out Caulfield Grammar School for a good template to go by. This article uses footnotes and references to make things easy to verify. It also does a good job of avoiding the gossipy tone that afflicts many school articles. I realize that the verifiability requirement is going to limit your article to mostly information from the official school website, which is probably not that interesting to students, but that's the only way that other editors (and readers) can be sure the information is factual. If you think something at the school is worth putting in, but isn't verifiable, see if you can get the webmaster at the school to add it to the site, or see if you can get a local reporter to write a story about it. Kaldari 23:40, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

It is inappropriate for other users to edit a user's page; they should use the talk page instead. brainpo (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:ThinkingInBinary


text:
Allegheny Moon

Allegheny Moon is a popular song written by Al Hoffman and Dick Manning and published in 1956.

The song is best known in a 1956 recording by Patti Page. This recording was released by Mercury Records as catalog number 70878, with the flip side The Strangest Romance. It first reached the Billboard magazine charts on June 16, 1956. On the Disk Jockey chart, it peaked at number 2; on the Best Seller chart, at number 5; on the Juke Box chart, at number 2; on the composite chart of the top 100 songs, it reached number 2. The song was also a hit in Australia peaking at number 3.

Tracks

 * A. "Allegheny Moon": Written-by – Hoffman*, Manning* 2:48
 * B. "The Strangest Romance": Written-by – Fay Tishman 2:09

Other recordings

 * Bing Crosby and Lindsay Crosby recorded the song in 1956 for use on Bing Crosby's radio show and it was subsequently released on the CD New Tricks - 60th Anniversary Deluxe Edition (2017).
 * Guy Mitchell included the song in his album A Guy in Love (1958).
 * Anne Murray recorded a cover of the song for her album Croonin' (1993).

title: Allegheny Moon


text:
User:Aphor

Aphor
I began using this name as a freshman with my student SYSV account on BUHUB at Bradley University. It is a contraction of the word aphorism or the greek word aphorzim (meaning: horizon). An aphorism is an expression of an idea by defining the horizon of that idea.

What is an aphorism?
Try to think of orienteering and using a map and compass to triangulate your location. You will need two to three landmarks on your horizon that you can identify on your map, and compass headings for each of those landmarks. If you draw lines on your map in the directly opposite heading from each of your landmarks, the intersection of those lines will be your estimated relative position on the map. An aphorism is an attempt to triangulate an idea by describing a minimum number of vectors to identify the aspect or perspective of the main idea. The meaning of the idea itself is left to the reader's authentic interperetation. Please comment!

Wikipediactvity
I have a BS in Political Science concentrating in Political Theory and Comparative Politics with a minor in Philosophy and lots of interest and experience with the Internet and Free Software. I may feel compelled to edit things in those domains.

aphor 02:36, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Someone who uses aphorisms could be called an aphorist. (courtesy of Matt Jones' crossword "Big Time"

title: User:Aphor


text:
Al Batinah Region

Al-Bāţinah (ٱلْبَاطِنَة) was one of the regions (Mintaqat) of Oman. On 28 October 2011, Al-Batinah Region was bifurcated into Al Batinah North Governorate and Al Batinah South Governorate.

The region occupied an important location on the coast of Gulf of Oman. It lay between Khatmat Malahah in the north and Ras al-Hamra in the south, and confined between Al-Hajar Mountains in the west and the Gulf of Oman in the east. Most of Oman's population were in that region, because of the green plains between the Hajar Mountains and the sea.

Provinces
Al Batinah Region contained the largest number of provinces (wilayat), numbering twelve 12:

 * Sohar
 * Ar Rustaq
 * Shinas,
 * Liwa
 * Saham
 * Al-Khaburah
 * Suwayq
 * Nakhal
 * Wadi Al Maawil
 * Al Awabi
 * Al-Musannah
 * Barka

Suwayq is considered as the biggest wilayah in the Batinah region. Sohar was the regional capital. It is a populous city with a corniche, fish souq and numerous mosques.

title: Al Batinah Region


text:
Guadix

Guadix (Local pronunciation: [waˈðih]) is a city and municipality in southern Spain, in the province of Granada.

The city lies at an altitude of 913 metres, in the centre of the Hoya of Guadix, a high plain at the northern foothills of the Sierra Nevada. It is located on the Linares Baeza–Almería railway. The city was built in the vicinity of gullies and badlands.

Early history
Evidence of human settlement in the area surrounding Guadix goes back to at least the Bronze Age.

Ancient
Guadix el Viejo, 6 km northwest, was the Roman Acci (also Accitum) mentioned in Pliny's Natural History and as Akki by Ptolemy, who placed it among the Bastetani, whose capital was Basti. It is not known for certain whether it is of Phoenician or of early Spanish origin. The existence of an oppidum with a well-defined urban plan from the 6th century BC has been documented; archeological excavations have revealed complex spaces with straight walls and red adobe floors. Kilns and silos have also been found, demonstrating a high level of development in the settlement. Throughout the Iberian era, there was a shift in planning regarding the construction methods and the alignment of residences. The importance of craftsmanship and industry in the area has been shown by the discovery of what might be an oil press below Calle Palacio. Excavations at Cine Acci have uncovered a slate dwelling from the 5th century BC.

According to Macrobius, the primitive inhabitants paid homage to Mars under the name of Neton. Julius Caesar established the Roman colony called Julia Gemella. According to tradition, it was the seat of the first bishopric in Hispania, in the 2nd century.

Roman coins were minted at Julia Gemella, and the settlement continued to be an important centre of commerce, leaving artifacts such as the Pedestal of Isis, as well as the ruins of a Roman theatre. In addition, a network of sewers, galleries and water conduits have been uncovered in the city, as well as the possible remains of a Roman temple.

Acci would have enjoyed the benefits of the Ius Italicum, which would have favoured social and economic development.

The fall of the Western Roman Empire negatively influenced the status of Acci, whose population may have in large part moved to rural areas, and the city is known to have been one of the first in the Iberian Peninsula to adopt Catholicism. Few remains have been found dating from the IV to the XI century.

From the Moors to the Reconquista
After 711 it rose to some importance as a Moorish fortress and trading station, renamed Wadi 'Ashi ("the Wadi of Acci", or "The Water of Life"). According to Arab sources, the city was initially a rebel against the Umayyads, and after the Caliphate's decline, Guadix found itself located on the border between the territories of Zirids of Granada and those of the Banu Jayrán of Almería. The city was integrated into the Almoravid Empire and then by the Almohad Caliphate, which conquered al-Andalus and later left the peninsula, leading to Guadix becoming a territory of the Emirate of Granada. During this period, Guadix was home to Ḥamda bint Ziyād, one of medieval Granada's foremost women poets. The city was the site of the Battle of Guadix in January 1362 in which a small Castilian army was routed by the forces of Muhammed VI, Sultan of Granada.

The civil wars in the kingdom of Granada turned Guadix into the capital of a short-lived kingdom ruled by Muhammad XIII of Granada: internal conflicts made the arrival of the Castillans easier, and the city surrendered without a siege to the kingdom of Ferdinand and Isabella in 1489.

Modern
By the end of the 19th century, Guadix had been famous for its cutlery; but its newer manufactures (chiefly earthenware, hempen goods, and hats) did not contribute to the city's economy significantly. Trade of wool, cotton, flax, corn and liqueurs took place in the city. The warm mineral springs of Cortes y Graena, once commonly frequented during the summer, are located roughly 10 kilometres west of Guadix.

The novelist Pedro Antonio de Alarcón, author of El sombrero de tres picos, was born in Guadix in 1833. The 19th and 20th centuries saw a period of economic crisis for the town. Currently Guadix is a center of production of fruit (strawberries), cereals, vegetables, as well as a minor tourist center.

Landscape
The Hoya Basin has been subject to erosion due to the presence of small rivers in the surrounding elevations, which have given the area its characteristic landscape of gullies and badlands. The sediments of the rivers Fardes and Guadix have turned the region into a fertile, then irrigated area, where the use of the land ranges from the cultivation of fruit trees, where peach cultivation abounds, to forestry, in particular that of poplar groves, as well as the sowing of cereals, leguminous plants and vegetables.

Main sights

 * Guadix Cathedral (16th-18th centuries), built over a Moorish mosque in Gothic-Renaissance style. The façade is in Baroque style.
 * Church of St. Augustine (18th century),
 * Church of Santiago (1540), with a Plateresque portal
 * Convent and church of the Conception
 * Alcazaba, a Moorish fortress commanding the town
 * Barrio de Santiago, a neighborhood characterized by troglodyte houses carved in tuff rocks

Notable people

 * Pedro de Mendoza
 * Antonio Mira de Amescua
 * Gaspar de Ávalos de la Cueva
 * Pedro Antonio de Alarcón
 * Ibn Tufayl

International relations
Guadix is twinned with: Guadix has also reached a "green-twinning" agreement with Piaseczno, Poland.
 * Twin towns — Sister cities
 * Celanova, Spain (since 2006).
 * L'Arboç, Spain (since 2019).

title: Guadix


text:
Mastropiero que nunca

Mastropiero que nunca was a theatrical humour/music show by Les Luthiers. It was first performed on Friday 9 September 1977 and last done on Sunday 27 February 1983 (although it was headlining only during 1977 and 1978). It consisted of nine new (never performed previously) live numbers, which ranged from a madrigal to a salsa skit.

It was the first show where Les Luthiers experimented with the use of light as a dramatic element, collaborating with stage lighting professional Tito Diz. The album recorded live in the Teatro Coliseo, Buenos Aires.

Numbers

 * Jingle Bass-Pipe: A taped introduction for the show, employing Marcos Mundstock's voice (as broadcaster) using puns.
 * La bella y graciosa moza (The beautiful gracious lass): A madrigal with humour relying again on puns. Sung (and probably written) by Marcos Mundstock.
 * El asesino misterioso (The mysterious killer): A long film advert, featuring Carlos Lopez Puccio playing the shoephone (a new instrument invented for the show).
 * Visita a la Universidad de Wildstone (Visit to Wildstone College): A short documentary, featuring Ernesto Acher playing another new instrument, the Calephone.
 * Kathy, la reina del saloon (Kathy, Queen of the Saloon): A Chaplin-esque number with Carlos Núñez playing piano, and the other five Luthiers making a comedic skit.
 * El beso de Ariadna (Ariadna's kiss): Three different versions of a love song, all of them sung by Daniel Rabinovich.
 * Sonatas para latín y piano (Sonatas for Latin and Piano): Four versions of an instrumental sonata, played by Carlos Nuñez (piano) and Carlos Lopez Puccio (violin).
 * Lazy Daisy: A music-hall number written and sung in English.
 * Payada de la vaca (Cow's Payada): A folkloric duel between two Argentinian payadores (played by Jorge Maronna and Daniel Rabinovich).
 * Cantata del Adelantado Don Rodrigo Díaz de Carreras: A long cantata including several folkloric passages, about a fictional Spaniard adelantado who'd pre-discovered South America.

At the end of each show, Les Luthiers came back for an encore, performing an older piece of theirs, which usually was one of the following:

 * Teorema de Tales (Thales' theorem as a song)
 * Oi Gadóñaya
 * El explicado (explanatory gato and the one they included in the filmed version).
 * Canción para moverse (when performing the show after 1979).

Cast
Ernesto Acher: Tambourine, Gom-Horn, Drums, Vocals, Calephone, Clarinet, Horn, Conga Percussion, Piano (*)

Carlos Lopez Puccio: Violin, Shoephone, Vocals, Kazoo, Bass, Latin Percussion.

Carlos Nuñez: Vocals, Recorder, Piano, Bunsen Flute.

Daniel Rabinovich: Violin, Vocals, Kazoo, Percussion, Bass-Pipe, Guitar.

Marcos Mundstock: Vocals, Percussion.

Jorge Maronna: Cello, Vocals, Bass, Cymbals, Kazoo, Guitar, Charango, Cuatro.

 * Depending on which number they played as encore.

title: Mastropiero que nunca


text:
User talk:Flowerparty

Leave a message

Deletion review for Amharic Wikipedia
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Amharic Wikipedia. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. A12n (talk) 19:22, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I know it's been a great many years, but do you remember where you got the release date for The Fall's The Frenz Experiment? All contemporaneous articles I've found hover in the May/June time frame; though, admittedly, none of those articles was from the U.K. alainsane (talk) 22:28, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:The Slider.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:The Slider.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

"The Voice (EP) (Album)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect The Voice (EP) (Album). Since you had some involvement with the The Voice (EP) (Album) redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:42, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

"High Voltage (Interntional album)" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect High Voltage (Interntional album). The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC  678  22:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Off The Record
Hello Flowerparty,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Off The Record for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Tol (talk | contribs) @ 15:29, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:Flowerparty


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black anarchism

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. No votes other than nom to delete, with consensus to keep rather than merge. -Splash 03:23, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Black anarchism
Neologism. Certainly there are black anarchists, but this really isn't a separate school of thought. When the term is used, and google says it rarely is, black is merely an adjective rather than part of a compound noun. The same caveats about trolls from the national anarchism nomination apply here. --Tothebarricades 19:15, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep Black anarchism deserves a space on here. It's a self-titled label, just as "Anarcha-feminism." Just because blacks are a minority they shouldn't be represented here? Black anarchism is its own unique form of anarchism. I believe this vote for deletion is racially motivated. RJII 19:56, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there's one of your trolls, calling me a racist no less. --Tothebarricades 19:58, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not calling you a racist, but it does appear to me that some kind of racial bias is going on here. RJII 21:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Black anarchism: RJII 20:56, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * From an essay called "The Fate of Black Anarchism": "We now call ourselves Anarchists. We say we want the end of all chains and the extermination of all oppression. Yet, in the Anarchist "movement", black folk and other folks of color are still in the senzala. We are still having to disguise ourselves, call whitey "Massa" and chain ourselves to the wall. No, don't talk about racism unless is in that very abstract sense of we-are-all-equal-let's-sing-kumbayas-and-pretend-the-color-of-our-skin-does-not-matter" racism. While there might be nobody yelling "die, nigger, die!", you can hear a very clear “shut the fuck up, nigger, just shut the fuck up." .....Do not censor this movement. RJII 20:17, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Women are not a minority. Be careful who you label, RJII. An An 04:40, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Obviously, in this context he is calling women a 'minority' in the sense that they aren't the "dominant group". People have varying definitions of "minority".
 * Keep. Though I must sanction RJII for calling the nominator "racist", "Black Anarchism" does seem to be a distinct idea, strongly connected to Ashanti Alston.--Pharos 21:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per User:Pharos. CanadianCaesar 21:52, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. As in most things, the adjective "black" renders this phenomenon something different from white anarchism in history, motivation, philosophy and actors. And that makes it worthy of examination/treatment.  deeceevoice 23:04, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Ehm, but shouldn't the anarchism article then be renamed white anarchism? Of course that's silly, but I'm just wondering ... :) DirkvdM 10:22, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * No, because the color of the skin of the proponents of most other kinds of anarchism isn't an element of their philosophy --they just happen to be white. Blacks have been oppressed because of the color of their skin, so naturally that's going to be an issue --fighting white supremacy is naturally an essential element included in the opposition of all external authority. But, as far as something like "white anarchism" the closest thing to that might be national anarchism. RJII 02:32, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with APOC as per User:Millerc, below .   Nandesuka 11:09, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with [APOC]. From all evidence I can find black anarchism does not exist as a movement separate from APOC and the people involved.  The website linked to from this page is almost entirely blank, nearly every section is empty, and the only evidence describing "black anarchism" also refers to is as "panther anarchism" and a movement of the "anarchist people of color" interchangably.  APOC is notable, more recognizable, and from what I can tell the statements made in each and every one of the pages brought up by RJ's google both refer directly to APOC and indicate that the two philosophies are identical in methods and goals.  Kev 09:06, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Faulty reasoning. Anarchist People of Color is just one movement within black anarchism. RJII 16:33, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think the above article, which appears to have a narrower focus— that of a particular "movement"— should be incorporated into Black anarchism, which, it seems to me, is very likely the broader, related subject. Just saw the above comment.  Concur. deeceevoice 20:36, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It is far more exclusive than the term APOC, and it is far less refered to APOC or prominent than APOC. Many people of APOC do not refer to themselves as black anarchists, but as anarchist people of color.  Black is one color, anarchist people of color denotes many colors.  Kev 01:43, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * What a load of B.S. LOL! RJII 02:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I realized after I clicked "submit" that "people of color" means something broader than is my common frame of reference as an African American. However, your argument still doesn't hold water.  APOC is a specific movement; whereas, this article addresses anarchism as a philosophy among black people, generally, regardless of their involvement, if any, in a particular movement.  deeceevoice 09:17, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge. If the term is in use by some people (let's say more than 1000 people - you wouldn't remove an article on a village just because it's too small, right?) then it deserves an article or at least a redirect. Which of those two depends largely on how much information is in the article which is separate from the article it is to be merged with. And that seems enough (although I haven't really studied it), so ultimately I'd say keep. DirkvdM 10:22, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep from a google search it appears to be a real term for a small but real movement Salsb 15:21, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - it's a movement notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Kaibabsquirrel 04:59, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - Judging from its web presence, it really does seem to exist. It may be miniscule, but it seems clear that it's not just a neologism invented by the same person who created the article.--Bcrowell 15:28, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - okay, fair enough. But - and this was my main concern, anyway - would everyone agree that this is not a "school of thought" on par with say, anarcho-syndicalism? And that it shouldn't be listed on the template? The problem is that RJII does anything he can to defame other users, so he'll add these marginal movements to the template and then call us racists or fascists when we remove them for being not quite notable enough for template attention. --Tothebarricades 19:11, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * I never called you a racist. I am saying that the attempt to delete this is racially motivated. It appears to me that you think that since blacks are a minority that they shouldn't be represented ..they're not notable ..which is B.S. Just because black anarchism less google hits than a philosophy proposed by a majority race means nothing. By, the way, you were the first to bring the dispute between you and me to a personal level in another article. Reap what you sow, buddy. If you want personal, I can get personal. RJII 19:21, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge The information is relevent, but would better be placed in articles like APOC (as Kev has already mentioned) or in articles about the various people refered to in the article. I think the fact that the Anarchist Black Cross was listed as a black anarchist group  shows how little some of the editors around here really care about getting factual information correct in their POV pushing. millerc 22:02, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * That's absolutely absurd. Not all black anarchism is part of APOC. RJII 22:04, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Well that may be true, but that's not what I said. I said merge the relevent info into the relevent articles.  The APOC is not just black anarchists as you seem to contend. millerc 22:07, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh really? Who is with the APOC that isn't black? RJII 00:48, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm not affiliated with the group (I doubt you are either), so I can't say who their most active or most outspoken members are, but a cursory look at their websites show just as many latino and hispanic contributers as black . And from what I can tell, their membership is open to all people of color; the only exclusion is white people.  All evidence I see is that the term "black anarchism" is associated with the people listed on that wikipedia page.  Since they are the ones using the term, it makes more sense that the respective articles on those anarchists can contain all relevent info. I don't think any good info. should be deleted; I just think there's a better place for it.  Maybe if you give some evidence for its wider usage, rather than just ranting, I would be willing to change my mind.  millerc 04:01, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't see what you're seeing. I looked at ..there is a Gustavo González, but that's a reporter from a newswire who has nothing to do with APOC. I look at your [ and don't see anything there ..i see a Passos Salazar but that's just the name of a graphic artist. Then I look at your last [ and all I see is a picture of some Palestinians standing by the wall. [[User:RJII|RJII]] 04:35, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:Millerc; even a cursory reading of the links he provided supports his contention that APOC is a group that not only has a significant non-black membership, but views latino, palestinian -- basically, in their own words, "non-white" -- oppressed as their natural "constituency". Nandesuka 11:17, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Distinct from APOC. Should not be merged. Nihila 02:02, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge as per User:Millerc. JamesBurns 05:22, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep IMHO I don't think the reason for VfD is valid Saswann 19:59, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, article is reasonably well written and pretty close to NPOV given it's highly contentious subject matter. I also agree with RJII in that it's a self-titled label, just as Anarcha-feminism, and Black Anarchism certainly qualifies as a separate Anarchist movement with identifiably unique goals (though I would strongly disagree with the article's author, who appears to be asserting that the goals are relatively peaceful and egalitarian).  I don't think the VfD was necessary. Xaa 01:06, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Born to Be with You (song)

"Born to Be with You" is a song by the American female vocal quartet The Chordettes. Written by Don Robertson, the song was released in 1956. The song reached a position of number five on the pop charts in the United States. In Ireland, Butch Moore & The Capitol Showband took it to No. 1 in 1965.

Background
In the Chordettes version, because of the short verses, the Chordettes hum two choruses in-between the verses, while in the second humming chorus, a whistling of composer Don Robertson, is heard playing a counterpoint melody. Several disc jockeys wrongly fade the song out when the bass guitar plays a rumba rhythm that seems to fade out, however, following a brief pause, the Chordettes sing a harmonic variation Capella of the word "AMEN".

Cover versions

 * Don Robertson also recorded this song in 1965.
 * In 1968, Sonny James recorded a version of the song which reached number one on the country charts.
 * J.D. Crowe recorded the song on his 1978 release Blackjack. It is a bluegrass rendition.
 * Bing Crosby recorded the song in 1956 for use on his radio show and it was subsequently included in the box set The Bing Crosby CBS Radio Recordings (1954-56) issued by Mosaic Records (catalog MD7-245) in 2009.
 * In 1973, Dave Edmunds had a No. 5 hit in the UK with the song, using his then popular "wall of sound" technique, borrowed from Phil Spector.
 * Dion DiMucci recorded the song as the title song of his 1975 Born to Be with You album, the song and much of the album being produced by Phil Spector.
 * Steel-string acoustic guitarist Leo Kottke included his rendition of the song on his 1974 album, Ice Water.
 * Country singer Sandy Posey released the song in 1978 and it went to No. 21 on the US country chart.

title: Born to Be with You (song)