text:
User talk:MatthieuG

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karmafist 14:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Image copyright problem with Image:DeSagana Diop.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:DeSagana Diop.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 16:36, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:James Singleton.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:James Singleton.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an arguement why we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 13:40, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Dbp logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Dbp logo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image can be used under a fair use license. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is 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.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 15:07, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rawle Marshall.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Rawle Marshall.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 07:23, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Axel Hervelle.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Axel Hervelle.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add , without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Mosmof 17:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Hong kong express logo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Hong kong express logo.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 orphaned, meaning that it is 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 under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 10:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Aigle azur logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Aigle azur logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 02:30, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Aero services group logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Aero services group logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 15:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Airlinair logo.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Airlinair logo.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:LaoagAirline.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:LaoagAirline.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 22:59, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Your image
Hi, I recently edited your uploaded image [Salcedo village.png] and uploaded it as a new version of the image. Almost no changes have been made besides increasing the contrast (looked like there was a brown haze across the skyline, is that part of the picture?) and brightness etc. to make it more appealing. If you have comments feel free to respond on my talk page. Thanks æt 'ə' rnal 'ðrAعon'  → 11:28, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Seair logo.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Seair logo.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. Skier Dude2 (talk) 04:26, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Salcedo village.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Salcedo village.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a [ list of your uploads]. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 20:40, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:MatthieuG


text:
Mikuláš of Kadaň

Mikuláš of Kadaň (Mikuláš z Kadaně) (born 1350, Kadaň – died 1419, Prague) was an Imperial clockmaker.

With Jan Šindel, Mikuláš designed the oldest part of the Orloj (which also known as Prague Astronomical Clock).

The clock was modified by Master Hanuš, who was mistakenly identified as the creator of the clock in a legend related by Alois Jirásek.

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

title: Mikuláš of Kadaň


text:
Albert I, Duke of Bavaria

Albert I, Duke of Lower Bavaria (Albrecht; 25 July 1336 – 13 December 1404), was a feudal ruler of the counties of Holland, Hainaut, and Zeeland in the Low Countries. Additionally, he held a portion of the Bavarian province of Straubing, his Bavarian ducal line's appanage and seat, Lower Bavaria.

Early years
Albert was born in Munich, the third son of Louis IV, Holy Roman Emperor, by his second wife Margaret II, Countess of Hainaut and Holland. Albert was originally a younger son, apportioned at best an appanage. He was only 10 years old when his father died, leaving most of his Bavarian inheritance to his eldest half-brother, Louis V, Duke of Bavaria, but also some appanages to the younger sons.

His elder brother, William V, Count of Holland, had engaged in a long struggle with their mother, obtaining Holland and Zeeland from her in 1354, and Hainaut on her death in 1356. William was supported by the party of burghers of the cities. They were opposed in this by the Hook faction, the party of disaffected nobles who were supporters of Empress Margaret. Margaret had resigned her sovereignty in favour of her son William V, but the result was a period of great upheavals and chaos which gave rise to the formation of these two opposing parties.

Regent of Holland
William's insanity resulted in the appointment of the then 22-year-old Albert as governor (or regent or ruwaard) of his brother's territories from 1358 onwards. During Albert's regency, affairs ran smoothly and trade improved. Troubles between the two political parties, the Hoeks ("Hooks") and Kabeljauws ("Cods"), remained barely beneath the surface. William lived for another thirty years. Albert did not formally succeed him until his death in 1388, by which time he had already arranged the marriage of his daughters to a number of Imperial princes and other nobles. The eldest daughter to have children was Margaret; her son Philip III, Duke of Burgundy would ultimately inherit Albert's territories.

Count of Holland
In Albert's own reign, troubles erupted between the Hoeks and the Kabeljauws because of a woman. Albert always had mistresses, but this time his attentions were drawn to Aleid van Poelgeest, a member of the Kabeljauw party. She was considered very beautiful and was able to gain political influence which was resented. A plot was hatched among the Hoeks as well as members of Albert's household. On 22 September 1392 Aleid was murdered in The Hague by Hoek nobles.

In his rage Albert persecuted the Hoeks, by sword and fire, conquering one castle after the other. Even his own son and heir, William, did not feel safe and went to live in Hainault. During his last years, Albert fought the Frisians. They were beaten time and time again, but were never completely conquered.

On Albert's death in 1404, he was succeeded by his eldest son, William. A younger son, John III, became Bishop of Liège. However, on William's death in 1417, a war of succession broke out between John and William's daughter Jacqueline of Hainaut. This would be the last episode of the Hook and Cod wars and would lead to the counties being placed into Burgundian hands.

Family and children
Albert married in Passau after 19 July 1353, Margaret of Brieg from Silesia (1342/43 – 1386), and had seven children, all of whom lived to adulthood: He also had several illegitimate children.
 * 1) Katherine of Bavaria (c. 1361 – 1400, Hattem),  married in Geertruidenberg in 1379 William I of Gelders and Jülich.
 * 2) Joanna of Bavaria (c. 1362 – 1386), married Wenceslaus, King of the Romans.
 * 3) Margaret of Bavaria (1363 – 23 January 1423, Dijon),  married in Cambrai in 1385 John the Fearless.
 * 4) William II, Duke of Bavaria (1365–1417), married also in 1385, Margeret, sister of John the Fearless. Father of Jacqueline of Hainault.
 * 5) Albert II, Duke of Bavaria (1369 – 21 January 1397, Kelheim).
 * 6) Joanna Sophia (c. 1373 – 15 November 1410, Vienna), married on 15 June 1395 Albert IV, Duke of Austria.
 * 7) John, Count of Holland (1374/76 – 1425), Bishop of Liège.

Albert contracted a second marriage in 1394 in Heusden with Margaret of Cleves (c. 1375 – 1412), sister of Adolph I, Duke of Cleves, but they had no children. He died in The Hague, aged 68.

title: Albert I, Duke of Bavaria


text: Category:Lithuanian poets

title: Category:Lithuanian poets


text:
Talk:Marinebrigade Ehrhardt

Copyediting
In addition to fixing the article's grammar, I changed 'rabid nationalist' to 'fervent nationalist' for the sake of encyclopaedic-ness. --Last Malthusian 14:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marinebrigade Ehrhardt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050218232620/http://www.ncf.edu/cuomo/WEIMAR.%20Background.htm to http://www.ncf.edu/cuomo/WEIMAR.%20Background.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:45, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Book by John Koster: "Hermann Ehrhardt - the man Hitler wasn't"
A book published by Idle Winter Press in 2018, containing a lot of information on Ehrhardt - http://www.idlewinter.com/hermann-ehrhardt.html 188.104.38.116 (talk) 13:37, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

Revert of 3 July 2023 edit by Johanss Visser
It seems that there was a connection between the swastika and antisemitism in 1919. The Krüger book, p. 34 (cited in note 14) says the swastikas "more probably" came via the Marinebrigade's contact with the Deutschvölkischer Schutz- und Trutzbund, which had distributed material from the Hammer Verlag (publisher) among the men coming back from Silesia. The Hammer Verlag was founded by the antisemite Theodor Fritsch, who in turn founded the antisemitic Reichshammerbund in 1912, which was using the swastika before 1919. See the linked articles. Given that connection, I reverted the edit. GHStPaulMN (talk) 22:12, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Marinebrigade Ehrhardt


text:
Judiciary Act of 1869

The Judiciary Act of 1869 (41st Congress, Sess. 1, ch. 22,, enacted April 10, 1869), formally An Act to amend the Judicial System of the United States and sometimes called the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, provided that the Supreme Court of the United States would consist of the chief justice of the United States and eight associate justices, established separate judgeships for the U.S. circuit courts, and for the first time included a provision allowing federal judges to retire without losing their salary. This is the most recent legislation altering the size of the Supreme Court. The Act was signed by President Ulysses S. Grant.

Supreme Court size
There were eight justices serving on the Supreme Court at the time the Act was enacted. The Judicial Circuits Act of 1866 had provided that the Court be reduced in size from ten to seven justices, but the reduction was to occur only as seats were vacated. Only one seat was vacated between the 1866 and 1869 Acts (this was in addition to the one vacancy that already existed when the 1866 Act took effect).

The 1869 Act set the Court at nine members:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Supreme Court of the United States shall hereafter consist of the Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum; and for the purposes of this act there shall be appointed an additional associate justice of said court. (bold added)"

The 1869 Act had the effect of creating a single new seat, filled by the appointment of Joseph P. Bradley.

U.S. Circuit Courts
In addition, the 1869 Act stipulated that each of the nine circuit courts of the United States would have a circuit judge appointed who would reside in that locale and have the same power and jurisdiction as the Supreme Court justice assigned to the circuit. It was stipulated that the chief justice and each of the associate justices had the duty to sit at least one term in the circuit every two years. The circuit court could be held by the circuit judge, the Supreme Court justice, or the two could hold the court together, in which case the Supreme Court justice would preside. Up until this time, circuit courts were normally only staffed by district judges and Supreme Court justices "riding circuit".

The salary of the circuit court judgeships created was set at $5,000 a year. In addition, the act stipulated that federal judges (including Supreme Court justices) who had served for ten years or more would receive a pension upon their retirement. The pension was set at the salary of the judge at the time of retirement. A judge had to be at least seventy years old at the time of retirement.

An earlier version of this legislation had been approved by the 40th Congress at the close of the session in March 1869, but fell victim to a pocket veto from outgoing president Andrew Johnson. The act was the third time that Congress had created circuit judgeships. The first time was the soon-repealed Judiciary Act of 1801, and the second was a single circuit judgeship in the frontier state of California which only lasted from 1855 to 1863.

Though the law did not abolish circuit riding by the justices of the Supreme Court, it significantly reduced the burden by requiring each justice to attend circuit court in each district within his circuit only once every two years. Circuit court riding would later be abolished by the Judiciary Act of 1891. The circuit courts themselves were abolished by the Judicial Code of 1911, which transferred their trial jurisdiction to the U.S. district courts.

title: Judiciary Act of 1869


text:
Herbert Kalmus

Herbert Thomas Kalmus (November 9, 1881 – July 11, 1963)  was an American scientist and engineer who played a significant role in developing color motion picture film. Kalmus was the co-founder and president of the Technicolor Motion Picture Corporation.

Biography
Kalmus received a bachelor's degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1904; the "Tech" in Technicolor is partly a tribute to that school. He earned his doctorate at the University of Zurich and was a research associate at MIT from 1908 to 1910 before teaching physics, electrochemistry and metallurgy at Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada. He was also a director of research for the Canadian government's electro-chemical laboratory.

On July 23, 1902, Kalmus married Natalie (née Dunfee or Dunphy) Kalmus, who became the color coordinator for nearly every live-action Technicolor feature released from 1934 to 1949. Although they divorced in 1922 after twenty years of marriage, they continued to live together, appearing as husband and wife, until 1944. He then married Eleanore King in 1949.

In 1912, Kalmus and fellow MIT graduate Daniel Comstock formed Kalmus, Comstock, and Wescott, an industrial research and development firm, with mechanic W. Burton Wescott, who left the company in 1921. When the firm was hired to analyze an inventor's flicker-free motion picture system, they became intrigued with the art and science of filmmaking, particularly color motion picture processes, leading to the incorporation of Technicolor in 1915. Most of Technicolor's early patents were taken out by Comstock and Wescott, while Kalmus served primarily as the company's president and chief executive officer.

In 1938, Kalmus received the Progress Medal from the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers. In 1952, he received their Samuel L. Warner memorial award, "for Technicolor's perfection of the imbibition process for 16mm color prints and for the techniques of making separate sound negatives for mass production by the 35mm/32mm method for excellence of 16mm sound", however it was "accepted on his behalf by Mr. Wadsworth Pohl, his associate." He was made an honorary life member of the SMPTE. He also received an award from the US Office of Scientific Research and Development.

He was a director at Stanford Research Institute.

He had two daughters. Kalmus' god-daughter (and later step-daughter), Cammie King, played the part of Bonnie Blue Butler in the film Gone With the Wind (1939). The autobiography of Herbert Kalmus, Mr. Technicolor (ISBN 1882127315), was published in 1993.

Legacy

 * Kalmus has a star on the Walk of Fame in Hollywood, California.
 * Kalmus Beach in Hyannis, Massachusetts, is named after him.

title: Herbert Kalmus


text:
Eric McClure

Eric Wayne McClure (December 11, 1978 – May 2, 2021) was an American professional stock car racing driver and team owner. He last competed part-time in the NASCAR Xfinity Series, driving the No. 0 Chevrolet Camaro for JD Motorsports.

Sprint Cup Series
McClure made three career starts in NASCAR's Cup Series. His debut came at Talladega, driving the No. 04 I Can Learn Chevy in 2004. He made the field in 35th position, and went on to finish 26th. McClure then attempted to make the July race at Daytona, but did not qualify.

McClure then landed a ride with the No. 73 Raabe Racing Enterprises Chevy for 2005. McClure did not qualify for the first two races, but did make the race at Las Vegas, starting 41st. His engine blew midway through the race and relegated McClure to 32nd. McClure left the team that week and did not run until August, when he attempted three races with Front Row Motorsports. However, McClure did not make any of those races. In 2006 he attempted and made the UAW-Ford 500, where handling issues relegated him to a 32nd-place finish in the No. 04 Morgan-McClure Motorsports Chevy, with a sponsorship from Hefty. In 2008, McClure attempted the Daytona 500 in the No. 37 Front Row Motorsports Chevy sponsored by Hefty, but failed to qualify.

On April 11, 2009, Morgan-McClure Motorsports announced they would be attempting the Talladega race in April, after a year and a half absence from the sport. Eric McClure attempted to qualify the Hefty-sponsored No. 4 Chevrolet but did not make the field.

In January 2014, McClure announced that he would attempt to compete in the 2014 Daytona 500 driving the No. 35 Ford for Front Row Motorsports; he failed to qualify for the race. In May 2014, McClure returned to the No. 35 car for Front Row Motorsports at Talladega, but failed to make the race.

Xfinity Series
McClure made his Busch Series debut in 2003, running at Rockingham Speedway. He qualified the No. 05 I Can Learn Chevy in 22nd and finished 26th despite an accident.

McClure made four starts in 2004, running two races for his family team (MMM) and two more for Mac Hill Motorsports. His best run was at Memphis, where he finished 22nd. He also finished three of his four starts.

McClure added eight starts in 2005, seven for Means Racing, but only managed a best finish of 30th at Texas. McClure did attract the eye of James Finch and ran one race for that team at Daytona. However, he finished 32nd with a blown engine and did not follow that run up with any starts, returning to Means. McClure did not qualify for two races. At Bristol, McClure was sent home because of a rainout of qualifying, and at Memphis, McClure missed the field by one spot.

For the 2007 season, McClure teamed up with Davis Motorsports for a 32 race schedule. McClure brought sponsor Hefty to the team with him.

He drove for Front Row Motorsports in the Busch Series in 2008, with Hefty sponsoring the car for all the races in the No. 24 Chevrolet. He scored his best career finish of 15th in the Aaron's 312 at Talladega In 2009, he and sponsor Hefty moved to Rensi/Hamilton Racing, where he drove the No. 24 Ford Fusion. This proved to be a good move; he qualified for every race and finished a career best 17th in the final points standings. McClure stuck with the team, now Team Rensi Motorsports, for 2010. However, performance slipped and the economic downturn forced McClure to be cautious with the team's equipment, with Rensi bringing a second team over for COT races that was raced by Kelly Bires. Despite this, McClure finished 24th in points but announced his departure from Rensi on November 30. According to McClure, Rensi's budget was so low to the point that they would rarely have full tire allotments for the races after Las Vegas, with most of the allotments going to the races run with Bires.

McClure announced on December 1, 2010, that he and Hefty would move to TriStar Motorsports for 2011 alongside series veterans Mike Bliss and Jeff Green. It was further announced in January that TriStar Motorsports will change their car numbers, with McClure piloting the No. 14 Hefty Blackout Toyota. McClure would suffer his second career concussion after a hard crash at the Subway Jalapeño 250 at Daytona in July. He would finish the season 19th in points.

During the 2012 Aaron's 312, McClure was involved in a 16-car pile up on lap 117, when cars spun in front of him and he slammed the inside wall head on. McClure was extracted from his car. He was airlifted to the University of Alabama Hospital in Birmingham, Alabama, for further evaluation. NASCAR stated that McClure was talking to the rescue crew while he was being extracted from his car. After staying two nights in the hospital, TriStar Motorsports team spokesperson Emily Brandt announced on May 6, 2012, that McClure had suffered another concussion, the third of his career, and internal bruises from the accident. On May 9, TriStar announced that McClure would sit out the Nationwide race at Darlington due to his concussion, and that start and park driver Jeff Green would drive the No. 14 while Tony Raines and Kevin Lepage would start and park the No. 10. McClure would sit out the next 4 races before being cleared by NASCAR to drive in time for the race at Road America. In spite of starting only 28 races, McClure finished the 2012 season with a career best points finish of 16th. On January 9, 2013, TriStar announced that McClure would return to their team for the 2013 season. McClure started his season on a high note by taking his best career finish of eighth at Daytona. In August, however, he was hospitalized with what was determined to be acute renal failure; he was forced to step out of the No. 14 car for four races while he recovered, being substituted for again by Jeff Green. McClure returned to competition in September at Chicagoland Speedway. He missed a race later in the year at Texas Motor Speedway due to medical issues, before being hospitalized again prior to the season finale at Homestead-Miami Speedway.

Before the 2014 season McClure announced that he would only be running a partial schedule in the Nationwide Series.

In 2015, McClure and his sponsors moved to JGL Racing, where he drove the No. 24 Toyota Camry at all 33 races. After 9 races however, both he and JGL parted ways and McClure returned to TriStar Motorsports for the rest of the season, with JGL allowing him to continue to run the 24 car for that team. At the fall race at Kentucky, McClure would suffer his fourth concussion, in a single car crash in turn 3. In 2016, McClure joined JD Motorsports for the season opener at Daytona, driving the No. 0 Chevrolet Camaro.

Team ownership
On July 28, 2015, McClure and former Nationwide driver Hal Martin formed Martin-McClure Racing, a K&N Pro Series East team. Among the team's drivers were Chad Finchum and Austin Cindric.

McClure stepped away from the team in 2018 after his domestic violence arrest.

Personal life
McClure was born in Chilhowie, Virginia, and was a graduate of Emory and Henry College. He was married to Miranda from 2004 until their divorce in 2018, and had seven daughters.

McClure's home in Abingdon, Virginia, suffered major damage in an April 27, 2011 tornado. However, McClure and his family sat out the storm in their basement and were uninjured.

On February 11, 2018, McClure was arrested for domestic violence. McClure plead no contest to a misdemeanor domestic violence charge and sentenced to 12 months probation, substance abuse counseling, and was ordered to undergo a mental health assessment. McClure's ex-wife said that McClure choked her and hit her in front of their children.

Death
McClure died on May 2, 2021, at the age of 42 after suffering from serious health issues, including diagnosis of a severe musculoskeletal disorder in the summer of 2019. He was engaged to Keira Brinegar Tibbs at the time of his death.

NASCAR
(key) ( Bold – Pole position awarded by qualifying time. Italics – Pole position earned by points standings or practice time. * – Most laps led. )

Craftsman Truck Series
$1$ Season still in progress. $$ Ineligible for series championship points.

title: Eric McClure


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ring of Conflict

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent 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 Delete. --Ryan Delaney talk 02:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Ring of Conflict
Non-notable, neologism.
 * Delete JeremyJX 14:11, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now.  Delete, do not merge to Nethack.  Such a minor branch of the subject that it doesn't even deserve a redirect or a mention in its parent article. —Cryptic (talk) 08:05, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn game item.  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk   09:06, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. Martg76 09:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete NN --Rogerd 18:39, 8 October 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:
Seal of South Dakota

The Great Seal of the State of South Dakota was designed while the area was a territory, in 1885. The outer ring of the seal contains the text "State of South Dakota" on the top and "Great Seal" on the bottom. Also, the year of statehood was 1889. Inside the inner circle of the seal contains the state motto "Under God the People Rule". The picture features hills, a river with a boat, a farmer, a mine, and cattle. The items in the image are to represent the state's commerce, agriculture, industry, and natural resources.

Use of the South Dakota state seal is governed under South Dakota state law as follows:

1-6-3.1.  Use of seal or facsimile without authorisation prohibited Violation as a misdemeanor. No person may reproduce, duplicate, or otherwise use the official seal of the State of South Dakota, or its facsimile, adopted and described in §§ 1-6-1 and 1-6-2 for any for-profit, commercial purpose without specific authorization from the secretary of state. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

1-6-3.2.  Sale of seal facsimile without authorisation prohibited Violation as misdemean ours. No person may sell or offer for sale a replica or facsimile of the official seal of the State of South Dakota, adopted and described in §§ 1-6-1 and 1-6-2, without specific authorization from the secretary of state. A violation of this section is a Class 1 misdemeanor.

1-6-3.3.  Royalty for the use of seal—Educational purposes excepted. The secretary of state shall charge a royalty for the privilege of using the state seal. The secretary of state may not charge a royalty if the state seal is used for an educational purpose. All royalty fees collected according to this chapter shall be deposited in the state general fund.

Many color representations of the South Dakota state seal on the Internet are not an accurate representation of the color seal for South Dakota, as the current representation of the state deal is designated in state law.

1-6-1.  State seal adopted Reproductions. There is hereby adopted as the official coloured seal of the State of South Dakota, a reproduction of the seal, described in article XXI, section 1 of the Constitution of the State of South Dakota, and made in conformity in addition to that but whose proportions andcolouredd detail are set out specifically in accord with an original painting of the great seal produced by John G. Moisan of Fort Pierre and shall be the basis for all reproductions of the great seal of the State of South Dakota. The South Dakota Secretary of State is the designated custodian of the South Dakota State Seal.

title: Seal of South Dakota


text:
Judiciary Act of 1891

The Judiciary Act of 1891, also known as the Circuit Court of Appeals Act of 1891, or the Evarts Act after its primary sponsor, Senator William M. Evarts, created the United States courts of appeals and reassigned the jurisdiction of most routine appeals from the district and circuit courts to these appellate courts. Therefore, it is also called the Circuit Courts of Appeals Act.

The Act created nine new courts that were originally known as the "United States circuit courts of appeals;" the name was changed to its current form in 1948. Each court was composed of two circuit judges and one district judge. The new courts had jurisdiction over most appeals of lower court decisions. The Supreme Court could review either legal issues that a court of appeals certified or decisions of court of appeals by writ of certiorari. The change resulted in an immediate reduction in the Supreme Court's workload (from 623 cases filed in 1890 to 379 in 1891 and 275 in 1892).

The Act also eliminated the requirement of "circuit riding" by Supreme Court justices under which the justices sat as trial judges on the U.S. circuit courts. The circuit courts themselves remained in existence, although without their former appellate jurisdiction, until they were abolished and their trial jurisdiction transferred to the district courts by the Judicial Code of 1911.

The Act allowed certain types of cases to be appealed directly to the Supreme Court (bypassing the new circuit courts of appeals), such as convictions for capital crimes; cases involving the construction or application of the United States Constitution; or cases in which a federal law or treaty or a state constitution or law was alleged to violate the U.S. Constitution.

title: Judiciary Act of 1891


text:
Love Me, Love Me Not (Singaporean TV series)

Love Me, Love Me Not (真爱无敌) is a romance drama about two angels who must fulfill a mission to make certain people fall in love. It stars Jacelyn Tay, Xie Shaoguang, Wong Li-Lin, Chen Hanwei and Dennis Chew.

Plot
Two angels, Hong Luanxing (Jacelyn Tay, the Love Star) and Gu Guaxing (Wong Li-Lin, the Lonesome Star), are sent to Earth as a punishment for breaking a rule in heaven. On Earth, they take on new identities as Song Xingxing, a lawyer, and Song Jingjing, a matchmaker from the Social Development Board. Their punishment is to complete conflicting tasks: Hong Luanxing, the Love Star, now is a lawyer and has to break couples up. Gu Guaxing, the Lonesome Star, now has to pair singles up. Each of them has to break up/pair up 100 couples before their punishment is considered complete. Xingxing and Jingjing fell in love with Ziyan and Yiqin respectively later on in the show. In the end, both of the angels went back to heaven after completing their punishments and Xingxing broke another rule on purpose again in order to be sent back to Earth, so that she can be with Ziyan again. Yiqin was hit by a coconut on his head and died, thus went to heaven and Jingjing can be with him once again with a happy ending.

Cast

 * Jacelyn Tay as Hong Luanxing (Song Xingxing)
 * Wong Li-Lin as Gu Guaxing (Song Jingjing)
 * Xie Shaoguang as Zhao Ziyan
 * Chen Hanwei as Lin Yiqin
 * Dennis Chew as Xiongxiong
 * Chen Huihui

Soundtrack
想他不想他 (xiang ta bu xiang ta) by Jacelyn Tay


text:
American Spectator (literary magazine)

The American Spectator was a monthly literary magazine which made its first monthly appearance in November 1932. It was edited by George Jean Nathan, though Eugene O'Neill, Ernest Boyd, Theodore Dreiser, and James Branch Cabell were also listed as joint editors. The original editors left the publication in 1935, after which the paper continued monthly publication under new editors until October 1936. The American Spectator lasted another six months on a bimonthly before folding altogether.

Sherwood Anderson first published his short story entitled Brother Death in this journal. In 1933, the journal published a discussion, including some humor that not everyone recognized, on the Jewish question.

Anticipation
The publication was heralded before the first issue had even been published. A mainstream newspaper gossip columnist wrote: "New York's literati are in a furious flutter over the last word in literary high-hatting which is to be launched... Nathan and Boyd will be the office editors and O'Neill, Lewis and Dreiser, editorial writers... contributors will only contribute by special invitation from the editors... Payment for material to editors and other contributors will be one cent a word. No salaries whatever are to be paid Nathan and Boyd until financial conditions, if ever, warrant it... Contributors who have consented include Sinclair Lewis, Ernest Hemingway, Thomas Mann, James Joyce, William Faulkner..." None of those famous authors were ever published in The American Spectator, but the paper went on to become successful nonetheless.

Mission
The American Spectator laid out its mission and purpose in an editorial in the first issue:

 * The American Spectator has no policy in the common sense of that word... Sincerity, authenticity, and passion are its editorial criterion. Its aim is to offer a medium for the truly valuable and adventurous in thought, and to invite contributions from every quarter where stimulating opinions may be expected Clarity, vigor, and humor and the three indispensable qualities which must inform the presentation of its ideas. Real knowledge and a decided point of view will replace the usual conventional comment on irrelevant or foregone conclusions.

 * The essential editorial problem of the better and more ambitious type of monthly magazine is that it is much too large… Another defect of the average magazine is that its editor often permits himself to remain in harness long after his imaginative oats have given out and the magazine thereafter continues simply as a matter of habit. The moment the editors feel that The American Spectator is becoming a routine job, is getting dull and is similarly continuing as a matter of habit, they will call it a day and will retire in a body to their estates.

 * The editors of The American Spectator have invited distinguished writers in America, England, France, Germany, Austria and Italy to join them in contributing to its columns, and the almost unanimous response has been immensely gratifying. Each invited writer has been asked to write on what interests him most at the moment and each writer will be his own editor. It will be the policy of The American Spectator, in short, to have no policy that will in any way interfere with or restrain any expression of opinion that any of its invited writers may desire to offer ...

Articles were capped at 2,000 words and the newspaper refused to sell advertising. The first issue was so successful that an additional 20,000 copies had to be printed to meet demand, despite what was then considered a high price of fifty cents. Subsequent issues sold for ten cents.

The Jewish Question
The September 1933 issue featured a roundtable about the Jewish people's movement for a homeland titled "Editorial Conference (With Wine)." The piece was intended to be funny, but not received as humorous. Instead it was widely criticized as anti-Semitic. The statements of Boyd, Nathan, O'Neill, and Cabell were openly derisive of Jewish people and their desire for a homeland. Dreiser, although in favor of a Jewish homeland, was nonetheless seen as anti-Semitic because he made stereotypical comments about the "shrewdness" of Jews when it came to money.

American journalist Hutchins Hapgood was among the most vocal critics of the piece, attacking Drieser as anti-Semitic in a letter that The American Spectator refused to publish. Hapgood's letter was finally published in the April 1935 issue of the Nation.

Anti-Hitler position
The editors of The American Spectator were among the first Americans to question the rise of fascism in Germany and to denounce the Nazi party. In an August 1933 front-page editorial, the paper warned about the imminent problems of Hitler's thinking. "That recently naturalized German, Herr Adolf Hitler, has undertaken to define Germanism and Aryanism with such a complete disregard for the ascertainable facts of biology, anthropology and German history that one wearily realizes that nothing but a reversal to medieval methods can help him and his followers in an intellectually indefensible position... In brief, we turn back the clock of history, but the smell of tortured, burning flesh, the shadows of the Dark Ages, hang about it still."

Staff additions
In 1933, American etiquette expert Amy Vanderbilt came on as business manager for the publication.

In 1934 Dreiser urged Sherwood Anderson to join the editorial board of the paper, and Anderson accepted the offer despite the lack of pay. The position, Anderson wrote in a letter, "would give me an outlet and association with some very interesting men." At one point Anderson's friends advised him to send a piece he wrote to the more prestigious publication The Atlantic, but he gave it to The American Spectator out of a sense of loyalty.

Political agenda
As a member of the editorial board from November 1932 until February 1934, Theodore Dreiser sought to steer the paper towards a leftist agenda. Although he solicited contributions from Russian acquaintances, Marxist painter Diego Rivera, pro-labor journalist Bruce Crawford, and technocracy leader Howard Scott, Dreiser was mostly unsuccessful at turning the paper into a voice for the left political agenda. However, Dreiser did succeed at giving ink to issues such as railroad reform, birth control, and the criminal justice system.

Dreiser's political agenda was stymied by his coeditors, namely Nathan and Boyd, who rejected many of his attempted contributions to the content of the paper. Theodore Dreiser wrote a letter to British Novelist John Cowper Powys on September 8, 1932, describing the purpose of The American Spectator, and invited him to submit work for publication. In November 1932, Dreiser again writes to Powys explaining that his co-editors would not allow him to publish his article. Dreiser was further irritated by his belief that Nathan and Boyd were averse to articles about social and economic issues. The conflict led to Dreiser's resignation in January 1934, and his name appeared in the masthead for the final time in February 1934.

Founding editors depart
The founding editors (minus Dreiser and plus Anderson) made good on their promise from the first issue to leave the paper once they no longer enjoyed the work. A February 28, 1935, article in the New York Times announced their intentions: "Following their pledge of thirty months ago that when they tired of editing The American Spectator they would "retire to their estates," the editors announced yesterday the discontinuance of the periodical. The editors are George Jean Nathan, Ernest Boyd, Eugene O'Neill, James Branch Cabell and Sherwood Anderson."

It was reported that the publication was turning a profit of $1,000 per month, but the enterprise had evolved into a "property" as opposed to a "diversion".

Charles Angoff served as editor from 1935–36, and John F. Lehman was editor until the final issue in May 1937.

title: American Spectator (literary magazine)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albino Squirrel Preservation Society

 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 DELETE. -Splash 22:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Albino Squirrel Preservation Society
This is at my school, the University of North Texas. They exist to promote the uniqueness and rarity of albino squirrels, which are very uncommon.

NN Student organisation with 7 other 'chapters'. Hard to see or say why they exist, other than for self-serving reasons. Delete or move to BJAODN Eddie.willers 14:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete redundant with squirrel, which, to my surprise, already provides full coverage of this. --rob 14:36, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Blank the page and redirect to squirrel.— encephalon |  ζ   16:14:16, 2005-09-02 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn. Zoe 19:34, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, don't redirect or merge - that would be wrong. Dunc|☺ 23:16, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, because if I searched for 'Albino Squirrel Preservation Society', I'd be extremely disappointed to end up at squirrel. Flowerparty 02:09, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
 * LOL. Yes, fair point. The squirrel article, however, does mention them, and in so far as there's mention of something in a legitimate WP article, it may be more helpful to be able to direct interested readers to that article rather than make it somewhat more difficult (that was my reasoning anyway). It is likely that the mention of the society in the squirrel article is the work of one of its members (although not the creator of the ASPS page), but since the editors of the squirrel article do not object to its mention, and it has remained in that article, I don't see why a redirect to this information is a bad thing. There should not be an article in this space, however; with that I agree.— encephalon έγκέφαλος   09:25:26, 2005-09-09 (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:
The Gap

The Gap may refer to:

Antarctica

 * The Gap (Antarctica), on Ross Lsland

Australia

 * The Gap, New South Wales, a locality near Wagga Wagga, New South Wales
 * The Gap, Northern Territory, a suburb of Alice Springs, Northern Territory
 * The Gap, Queensland, a suburb of Brisbane, Queensland
 * The Gap, South Australia, a locality near Naracoorte, South Australia
 * The Gap (Sydney), an ocean cliff at Watsons Bay, Sydney, New South Wales
 * The Gap is a feature in Torndirrup National Park in Western Australia

Canada

 * Rural Municipality of The Gap No. 39, Saskatchewan

United States

 * Fort Indiantown Gap, a US Army fort located in Lebanon County, Pennsylvania

Arts

 * The Gap Band, an American music group
 * The Gap (Joan of Arc album), a 2000 album by Joan of Arc
 * The Gap (Bryn Haworth album), a 1980 studio album by Bryn Haworth
 * The Gap (song), a 1982 song by The Thompson Twins
 * The Gap (film) (El Boquete), a 2006 Argentine film
 * Der Spalt  (The Gap), a 2014 German film

Other

 * The Gap (book), discussing the cognitive difference between humans and other animals
 * The Gap, Inc., chain of retail clothing stores
 * The Gap (magazine), Austrian culture and music magazine
 * The Gap FC, an Australian soccer team
 * nickname for Volunteer Speedway in Greene County, Tennessee

title: The Gap


text:
Keith Thompson (politician)

Keith Thompson is a veteran figure in the British far-right who has been active in a number of movements down the years.

Biography
An Odinist, Thompson was a leading member of, speaker for and election agent and candidate of Oswald Mosley's Union Movement, which he joined in the 1960s whilst completing his National Service in the Royal Air Force. In 1973 the UM was renamed the Action Party and was led by Jeffrey Hamm, Mosley's secretary. However Thompson split from the group soon afterwards.

After his resignation, Thompson, along with Mike Griffin, joined the League of Saint George, an umbrella movement of the far right (although this origin of the League has been disputed by Thompson). Thompson was the first leader of the League of St George when it was launched in 1974 and he has remained a leading figure in the organisation, but has never officially endorsed any political party, although in 1982 he did share a platform with John Tyndall and Ray Hill on a speaking tour following the announcement of the formation of the British National Party. The association was not to last however and Thompson has long since ended any involvement with the BNP.

Thompson continues to run Steven Books, as well as a more recent venture, the Searchlight Victims Support Group, which is opposed to the work of the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight and has actively sought to recruit from the Trades Union Congress. This group publishes a journal New Target. Steven Books became the subject of controversy when it was revealed that their books could be bought online through Tesco, although a Searchlight campaign has since ended this arrangement.

title: Keith Thompson (politician)


text:
Talk:Jude Wanniski

No degree?
Question: How is someone who did not hold a degree in Economics,considered an economist?

The late Mr.Wanniski held degrees in Political Science and Journalism. If he were a scientific commentator instead of a political commentator, would he have been considered a physicist even though he held no degree in Physics? I would'nt think so. He was no more qualified to hold an opinion on political economics than the average man on the street, but yet his "supply-side" theories on economics was not only hailed as a "new" theory but made a centerpiece of national economic policy by 3 administrations. His theories have never been submitted to peer review, nor have they been accepted as a legitimate branch of study. To give this man and his theories accolades is the height of academic dishonesty and intellectual folly.

---

This questions implies a rather acadamic centric mindset. It presumes that a degree from a recognised university is the only way to attain knowledge or credentials or credibilty within a field.

Karl Marx is known as a philosopher and an economist although he had a degree in Law.

Adam Smith studied moral philosophy but is renowned for his thinking on economics.

Issac Newton studied Mathematics but many would refer to him as a physist.

Albert Einstein held a diploma in Education. And yet he is also remembered as a physist.

James Lovelock is regarded as a scientist. I don't belive he holds a degree in science.

2005-09-03 Terjepetersen

 * This is a good point, but these thinkers are taken seriously. To be considered an economist, one should have peer-reviewed articles, and be taken seriously in your field.  Krauthammer has a meical degree, but he also has a Pulitzer.  To my knowledge, Wanniski has no peer reviewed publications, so he should by no means be considered an economist.  I have edited the economist title--OneWorld22 08:49, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=wanniski&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search

---

It is a fallacy to credit Wanniski with the sole development of supply-side economics, and a still greater fallacy to argue whether or not supply-side theories deserve accolades. IMHO, it's neutral for us to describe the subject's background and allow the reader to determine what weight to lend to the theory.

Bruce Bartlett described the genesis of supply-side economics in his paper Supply-Side Economics: "Voodoo Economics" or Lasting Contribution?:  "Much of the early work had been done by economists Paul Craig Roberts...and Norman Ture.  Another key player was Jude Wanniski...who came to supply-side through the works of economists Robert Mundell and Arthur Laffer.  A lot of serious research underlay supply-side economics, much done by economists who would have rejected the supply-side label."

dpotter 14:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Supply side theory - trickle down - goes back to the 1800s, probably earlier. Something to do with sparrows eating seeds from horse manure.

Two Santa Claus Theory
Two Santa Claus Theory is a neologism associated only with Wanniski. Unless someone else uses this term, I recommend a merge. -- Perfecto 06:34, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

---

No argument here except that the Two-Santa article outweighs the Wanniski article, and would give the (incorrect) impression that Two-Santa was one of Wanniski's major works. Perhaps a merge should be delayed until some other portions of Wanniski have been developed?

dpotter 14:17, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

---

I found it conventient to see an entry for the Two Santa Claus Theory.

I vote against the merge too --Lee Vonce 20:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Kerry
The third link makes clear that Wanniski planned to vote for Kerry as of Oct. 27, 2004. Did he change his mind, or does a vote not count as an endorsement? St. Jimmy 05:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

He endorsed Kerry
Someone mangled the page. I editted it. Feel free to improve my changes, but there is no doubt he endorsed Kerry in '04.

Golf Partner
As one of Jude's regular golf partners, and as someone who worked on the Bush re-elction campaign, I can assure you Jude definitly endorsed Kerry, this led to many long rounds of golf, trading barbs! (btw Jude was deadly with his handcrafted pecan wood putter!!)

 * I wish I was lucky enough to meet him. I read his work in WSJ regularly during the 70s and although I did not always agree with his conclusions admired his writing and reasoning.Paulmeisel 03:24, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

 * No one cares. This is not a chat room. Jibal (talk) 07:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Two Santa Claus Theory
I've merged Two Santa Claus Theory to Jude Wanniski. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-25 09:51Z

Two Santa Claus Theory section needs another rewrite
While I personally applaud the attempts by editors Neoconsrfinished, and Huw Powell, to rewrite the Two Santa Clauses Theory section so that it describes some of the actual, damaging use to which the theory has been put (which was probably their reaction to Thom Hartmann today, noting on his show that this section has been rewritten to make it bland and hide how it's been used by Republicans), their new text is much more of a rant than an entry appropriate for an encyclopedia. I was going to rewrite this section further still, trying to incorporate their text into the earlier text, in order to remove the ranting parts of their text, but this might be a bigger job than I have time for at the moment, so I suggest someone else do it. I don't feel comfortable simply reverting the text, since that might just make the kind of rewrite I wanted to do, just get put off or not done at all.

JohnSawyer 03:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I've reverted the section as POV vandalism which removed sourced information. This seems to be a pattern in Neoconsrfinished's edits, which I do not at all "applaud".--Atlan (talk) 14:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Criticisms of the Laffer curve yet again.
Per discussions on Talk:Laffer_curve, Talk:Supply-side_economics and Talk:Arthur_Laffer, i believe that the edit "Numerous leading economists have rejected the empirical relevance of the Laffer Curve for the United States. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” 96% of economists surveyed in 2012 disagreed" is inappropriate for this article. Its only marginally relevant to the Laffer curve itself and, as such, really not relevant to a quick overview of the Laffer curve. Bonewah (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I guess i should elaborate here, in addition to the concerns expressed on supply-side economics talk, that the edit is US centric, that it applies only to one particular time and one particular tax, that claiming that they majority of the economists surveyed "rejected" or disagreed with the Laffer curve is inaccurate, i think the edit should be removed from this article because this is not an article about the Laffer curve, it is about Jude Wanniski and, as such, any coverage of the Laffer curve should be a brief, high level overview, with any details covered in the laffer curve article, not here. The edit above is currently in the Laffer curve article and so is irrelevant here.  Bonewah (talk) 13:22, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

 * If it wasn't for the Laffer Curve and his later connections to the Nation of Islam, the guy would be a complete nobody. Lipsquid (talk) 21:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The question isnt what Wanniski is know for, the question is, to what extent do we discuss the Laffer curve here, and what should that discussion entail. As discussed in supply side economics talk, this particular edit is a weak criticism at best, that only sort of applies to the Laffer curve, that only applies to the US, that only applies to Federal income taxes, that only applies to 2102 and doesnt really accurately describe what the source says, and its not really a reliable source anyway. Bonewah (talk) 23:58, 21 October 2015 (UTC)

 * To say that a nonpartisan academic group who writes peer-reviewed papers on economics with faculty members from Universities around the world is not a reliable source seems very odd. http://research.chicagobooth.edu/IGM/fellows/index.aspx Do you have a reason why you think they are not a reliable source?  Lipsquid (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * The reliability of the source is only one small part of my concern here. You have seen all this before, please respond to the substance of my comments. Bonewah (talk) 13:07, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

 * You listed many things, and it was unclear which was your real concern? Rather than saying a source you don't agree with is unreliable, which it is reliable, if you want to focus on whether the results of one study of the Laffer Curve is notable enough for inclusion in Jude Wanniski's article.  Then I agree with you that it is not really noteworthy for this article and I won't complain if you remove that paragraph.  Thank you for discussing the edit. Lipsquid (talk) 19:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

One more time, the criticism that this shouldn't be included because "it's US-centric" is ridiculous. Which country was Wanniski living in? Which country was he working in? Where is he actually known? Oh, that's right. The US. And since this is the idea that's he's most known for - even though it's not named after him he was it's most known promoter - it's obviously relevant.  Volunteer Marek  16:28, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * You conveniently forgot my numerous other concerns. Was he referring to only taxes in the US? No. Was he referring to only federal income tax?  No? Did he in any way suggest that any tax reduction would automatically increase revenue?  No.  You have taken a criticism which is barley even a criticism, misconstrued it, then plastered it everywhere irrespective of its importance to the subject.  This isnt something fundamental to the Laffer curve, its a poll of some economists about one tax at one time that only barely even mentions the Laffer curve, and several of those are comments that indicate an acceptance of the Laffer curve, not a "rejection of the empirical relevance" like we claim.  But you know all of this, or you should, as you were a party to these conversations at Talk:Supply-side_economics, and yet here we are again, Just like Lipsquid, you have no problem ignoring what i have said in the past, ignoring what other editors agreed were legit concerns and forcing me to re-argue the same thing over and over.  Well, i have news for you, im not going to "just drop it" just because you choose to be obtuse and waste my time.  That tactic isnt going to work. Bonewah (talk) 18:18, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm not interested in having my time wasted on pointless discussion with somebody who will obviously not be convinced no matter what. As of right now, I'm not the only one disagreeing with you. So consensus is against you. If you want, you can start an RfC and we can discuss it with others.  Volunteer Marek   14:55, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

RFC on description of the Laffer curve

 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
 * The description of the Laffer curve should not include the proposed text or mention of the poll. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:40, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Should the description of the Laffer curve in the section 'Lower taxes' make reference to an IGM poll of economists taken in 2012? If so, how should that poll be described? We are currently using the following text

 * Numerous leading economists have rejected the empirical relevance of the Laffer Curve for the United States. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” 96% of economists surveyed in 2012 disagreed.

Please note, similar edits and discussions exist on Art Laffer:

 * Numerous leading economists have rejected the viewpoint that the Laffer Curve's postulation of increased tax revenue through a rate cut applies to current federal US income taxes in the medium term. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” 96% of economists surveyed in 2012 disagreed. In response to this survey question, Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago said, “That’s a Laffer.”

Supply-side economics:

 * In 2012, a majority of economists surveyed rejected the viewpoint that the Laffer Curve's postulation of increased tax revenue through a rate cut would apply to federal US income taxes of the time in the medium term. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” none of economists surveyed by the University of Chicago agreed. 35% agreed with the statement "a cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would lead to higher GDP within five years than without the tax cut."

and the Laffer curve

 * In 2012, economists surveyed by the University of Chicago rejected the viewpoint that the Laffer Curve's postulation of increased tax revenue through a rate cut applies to federal US income taxes of the time in the medium term. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” none of the economists surveyed agreed and 71% disagreed.

Bonewah (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

 * I oppose inclusion of this material for the following reasons. (TL:DR version, we are misrepresenting the source here and its too obscure a reference for a summary)
 * At least in the case of the edits here on Jude Wnniski, what we have now is pretty clearly wp:OR. Nowhere does the source cited ask the question "Do you reject the empirical relevance of the Laffer Curve for the United States?" They only ask if "A cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut."  Which is not the same thing.  No where in the article cited do  "96% of economists surveyed" say anything like what we say here.  Moreover, the Laffer curve isnt even directly mentioned in the question, it only appears in the title of this section and in some of the responses, some of which clearly do not "reject the empirical relevance of the Laffer Curve".  Consider  Robert Hall's response "In addition, few studies suggest we are already at the max of the Laffer curve, though we may be close." or Edward Lazear "This is the Laffer curve issue. There is little (if any) evidence that rates exceed revenue-maximizing levels. See Mankiw, Feldstein." Neither of those two sound like they are rejecting the relevance of the Laffer curve, and assuming that the rest of the economists surveyed do is clear OR.
 * its citation's survey is highly specific to one tax (federal income tax), in one place (The US), at one time (2012). Thats a pretty US specific data point for a general discussion of the matter, although that might be appropriate for inclusion in the article about the Laffer curve, or Supply-side economics, its absurd to include it here in Jude Wanniski or Art Laffer.
 * Per above, Its too obscure to include here (or in Art Laffer) in a bio of a guy whos only connection to it is that he popularized the term. We have only three lines about the laffer curve here, one of which is a poll which doesnt really say what we claim and is only about one tax in one place at one particular time.  Its a bit like saying that "henry Ford founded Ford Motor company, popularized many methods of mass production, and in 2012 97% of some people surveyed didnt like Ford compact cars sold in the US." Just like here, including a specific criticism about the subject in a quick summary is ham fisted and out of place.  Again, this is different from what we might include in the Laffer curve page itself or supply side economic which had a fair discussion about this topic, hence the different  wordings you see.
 * expanding on my first point, even if we accept that this is not OR, we are misconstruing what the source actually says. Most of the economists surveyed didnt comment on the Laffer curve per se, only saying agree or disagree. Of the 40 economists listed, only 12 even commented at all, only 4 or 5 of the comments unequivocally reject the Laffer curve (maybe slightly more depending on how you read them). There is no reason to believe that those who disagree necessarily reject the Laffer curve. Of the ones that did comment 5 or 6 responded in such a way as to indicate that they actually accept the Laffer curve despite 5 of them responding disagree to the question.

 * remember, this (here and at Art Laffer)is a quick summary of the Laffer curve not an in depth discussion. Readers can click the link to learn more.  Consider what we have now:

 * Wanniski was instrumental in popularizing the ideas of lower tax rates embodied in the "Laffer Curve," and was present in 1974 when Arthur Laffer drew the curve on the famous napkin for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld.

 * Over the years, Wanniski repeatedly emphasized high tax rates as the cause of poverty in Africa. Wanniski collected details about the tax structures of various countries in Africa and explained how they were limiting the progress of the poor. These observations ended up as part of an episode of The West Wing.

 * Numerous leading economists have rejected the empirical relevance of the Laffer Curve for the United States. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” 96% of economists surveyed in 2012 disagreed.

 * Doesnt the last sentence seem a bit out of place? Looking at it now, the second sentence should probably be removed as well.

 * Its even more glaring at Art Laffer: (refs removed)

 * Although he does not claim to have invented the Laffer curve concept (Laffer, 2004), it was popularized with policy-makers following an afternoon meeting with Nixon/Ford Administration officials Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in 1974 in which he reportedly sketched the curve on a napkin to illustrate his argument. The term "Laffer curve" was coined by Jude Wanniski, who was also present. The basic concept was not new; Laffer himself says he learned it from Ibn Khaldun and John Maynard Keynes.
 * Although he does not claim to have invented the Laffer curve concept (Laffer, 2004), it was popularized with policy-makers following an afternoon meeting with Nixon/Ford Administration officials Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld in 1974 in which he reportedly sketched the curve on a napkin to illustrate his argument. The term "Laffer curve" was coined by Jude Wanniski, who was also present. The basic concept was not new; Laffer himself says he learned it from Ibn Khaldun and John Maynard Keynes.

 * A simplified view of the theory is that tax revenues would be zero if tax rates were either 0% or 100%, and somewhere in between 0% and 100% is a tax rate which maximizes total revenue. Laffer's postulate was that the tax rate that maximizes revenue was at a much lower level than previously believed: so low that current tax rates were above the level where revenue is maximized.

 * Numerous leading economists have rejected the viewpoint that the Laffer Curve's postulation of increased tax revenue through a rate cut applies to current federal US income taxes in the medium term. When asked whether a “cut in federal income tax rates in the US right now would raise taxable income enough so that the annual total tax revenue would be higher within five years than without the tax cut,” 96% of economists surveyed in 2012 disagreed. In response to this survey question, Richard Thaler of the University of Chicago said, “That’s a Laffer.”

 * "The first two sentences accurately sum up the Laffer curve's history and concept. The third points out that some poll of some economists kinda sorta disagrees with it, when applied to one specific tax at one time in one country.

 * I feel that the optimal text for this issue will likely be different for supply side economics and the Laffer curve as opposed to the bios of Art Laffer and Jude Wanniski, but in the interest of a centralized discussion, i started the RfC here to help resolve the deadlock above. There are similar discussions at the three other pages I mentioned. Bonewah (talk) 21:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

 * strongest oppose inclusion the poll was not "Are Jude Wanniski's claims about taxes valid or not?" - utilizing a source completely out of context, particularly in an article about a living person is completely inappropriate. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  01:40, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * This is NOT an article about a living person. Also, Wanniski is the one who popularized the idea of the Laffer curve, hence something about its validity certainly belongs in the article.  Volunteer Marek   21:31, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You do realise this is Jude Wanniski's article, right? FoCuS contribs ;  talk to me!  00:18, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Not sure what your point is.  Volunteer Marek   04:04, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

 * strongest agreement for inclusion Subject of article is only notable for Laffer Curve. Why not just nominate the whole article for deletion? Lipsquid (talk) 20:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose inclusion the source makes no mention of Wanniski and took place nearly a decade after Wanniski's death (presumably his career ended significantly before that) If there was a source tying this poll to Wanniski then it would warrant inclusion but otherwise I believe it is original research. As I have said on other talk pages, the poll applies only to federal income taxes at that particular time and so does not mean that the Laffer curve does not work in general Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 15:39, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Support inclusion That 96% of "top" economists disagree with the question statement is relevant, interesting and important. Better yet would be to include the reference's bottom right graph showing that. (I'm not an economist though so those are layperson views.) Daniel Vallstrom (talk) 16:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Question, do you think its interesting and important enough that it should be included in a short summary in an article that is only tangentially related to the Laffer Curve, such as this one? Again, what winds up on the Laffer curve page might be different than what winds up on this biography. Also relevant is that %96 of top economists did not really disagree, thats one disputed interpretation of the source. Bonewah (talk) 17:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

 * Oppose inclusion: the article is not about the Laffer curve, even if the subject is notable partly for his opinions on it, so detailed commentary and criticism of it easily constitutes WP:COATRACK. This may (or may not, due to the extensive arguments presented above) be appropriate in articles specifically about the Laffer curve, although care should be taken not to give excessive WP:WEIGHT to the situation in the United States. LjL (talk) 18:12, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose inclusion Directed here by rfc bot. This appears to be COATRACK and not an appropriate addition. Capitalismojo (talk) 03:26, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

 * Strong Support for Inclusion Called by bot. Per WP:FRINGE, fringe views (the idea that cutting taxes increases revenues is clearly fringe) should always be put into context, with the mainstream view given prominent place, to prevent the danger of creating a WP:WALLEDGARDEN. Darx9url (talk) 05:07, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I dont believe that the Laffer curve is a fringe view, but even if it were, the citation in question does not support that claim. Bonewah (talk) 14:11, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that the Laffer curve is not a fringe view. Note that it argues that for some tax rates that cutting tax rates may increase revenue e.g. cutting taxes from 100% to 90% will probably lead to an increase in economic activity. The Laffer curve does not say that cutting taxes will always lead to an increase in revenue, indeed it posits that there is one (or multiple) tax rates which maximise revenue and lowering rates below this will lead to a decrease in revenue Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 14:22, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * "Clearly fringe"? Look, coming to RfC by bot calls is all well and good, but perhaps read up a tiny bit about the subject before decreeing... The Laffer curve is obviously not "fringe"; what may be in question is at which point in the curve lowering taxation stops yielding higher revenues (and certainly, it could be argued that in many countries today, we're already lower than that on the curve, but how does that invalidate the curve itself?) LjL (talk) 16:26, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Folks, can you actually address what the user said not what you pretend they said? You know, read up a tiny bit of their comment? They didn't say the Laffer curve was a fringe view. They explicitly state that "the idea that cutting taxes increases revenues is clearly fringe". Which it is. And that's actually exactly why we need something in the article about the fact that it's fringe.  Volunteer Marek   19:31, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that "cutting taxes always increases revenues" is a fringe view, but no one on this page has suggested that it is true. I therefore assumed that Darx9url was referring to the Laffer curve. If Darx9url wishes to correct me and point me to where in the article/talk page anyone has suggested this, then that is up to them Absolutelypuremilk (talk) 19:44, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The citation in question does not support that claims made in the article, full stop. WP:FRINGE has nothing to do with it. Bonewah (talk) 19:52, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Opposed When you get weasel phrases like "Numerous leading economists" which don't include legitimate serious references or citations, such claims should not be included. The reference provided isn't solid enough to support the idiot emotive rhetoric. Damotclese (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Bonewah, Damotclese & TheRedPenOfDoom. FoCuS contribs ;  talk to me!  00:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

This RfC should apply to at least the Art Laffer article, plus possibly the supply side economics and the Laffer curve articles as well
It is my belief that whatever is decided here should apply to the other three articles i named in both the RfC and this subsection. At least in the case of the Art Laffer article, the content is exactly the same and the same objections apply there as here. I am going to ping everyone who has commented here in case there is some objection. If you do have an objection, please spell out here what exactly you see as the issue so we can resolve it. Bonewah (talk) 19:24, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

Wrong article, nothing to discuss here. If you want an RfC for an article, open it on that article's talk page. The format and general requirements are laid out on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment Lipsquid (talk) 22:44, 24 December 2015 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

It may be relevant to this RfC's outcome to mention that on Laffer curve, the passage in question has been reinstated again (into the lead section!) after some time, under the pretence of an "ungoing edit war" about it. This is even though there seemed to be agreement to leave it out (including by the editor reinstating it now, at least from the lede). Let's please determine whether this RfC's consensus applies. LjL (talk) 23:57, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Discussion closed, if you want an RfC on another page open it there. Lipsquid (talk) 07:57, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Or you could open an RfC to include that material like WP:ONUS clearly states "The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." Bonewah (talk) 16:03, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Or you could stop trying to WP:GAME wikipedia rules and policies to try and get your way at all costs. This RfC does NOT and NEVER has applied to other articles. Stop being obstinate. At some point it becomes very disruptive.Volunteer Marek (talk) 16:55, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Let me see if i understand you fully. After an RfC covering this topic was closed with a decision of 'remove', you feel that you should be able to unilaterally re-add that very same material and that its incumbent on other editors to argue for its removal and that you should not have to make any effort to gain consensus to re-add this material despite WP:ONUS saying the exact opposite.  And anyone who says that you should do anything at all to gain consensus before adding this material is "gaming the system". Bonewah (talk) 19:39, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Yes and you need to re-read WP:ONUS. Having consensus that information is not useful or constructive in one article, does not mean that the same sourced content is now assumed not to be constructive in every topic on Wikipedia.  That would be insane. The RfC made its decision and the information is not in the article.  No one has added it back so this is all rather pointless at this time. Lipsquid (talk) 18:15, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Jude Wanniski. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080723021220/http://www.nationalreview.com:80/100best/100_books.html to http://www.nationalreview.com/100best/100_books.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 03:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jude Wanniski


text:
Tony Roper (racing driver)

Anthony Dean Roper (December 13, 1964 – October 14, 2000) was an American professional stock car racing driver. A competitor in the NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series, he died after suffering injuries in a racing accident at Texas Motor Speedway.

Early career
Roper was born in Springfield, Missouri, to Dean Roper and Shirley Medley. Growing up his family was heavily involved in auto racing, as his father was a noted competitor in ARCA and other stock car racing series. Roper started racing in 1986. For the next six years he raced in IMCA Modifieds and late models on Midwest dirt and asphalt tracks. In 1992 he finished in second place for the American Speed Association Rookie of the Year Award. He started racing in the NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series in 1995, and the Busch Series in 1999.

Death
At the Craftsman Truck Series O'Reilly 400 at Texas Motor Speedway on October 13, 2000, Roper was involved in an accident when he attempted to pass Steve Grissom and Rick Ware. Roper's Ford made contact with Grissom's front bumper causing it to take a sudden hard-right turn, which then caused the truck to impact the concrete wall of the tri-oval. An unconscious, unresponsive Roper was extricated from his truck, taken to the infield care center at TMS, and subsequently airlifted to Dallas's Parkland Memorial Hospital. Roper was determined to have a severe neck injury which prevented the flow of blood to his brain. He was put on a ventilator, and succumbed to the injury the day after the race, aged 35.

Roper was the third NASCAR driver to perish from racing related injuries in 2000, the first two being Adam Petty and Kenny Irwin Jr., respectively. It was the second fatality in the Craftsman Truck Series, the first being that of John Nemechek in 1997. Roper's was the first racing fatality recorded at Texas Motor Speedway.

A funeral service for Roper was held at the Fair Grove High School gymnasium, where he graduated from. More than 600 people attended.

Tony's father, Dean Roper, died in a crash just a year later (his death was caused by a heart attack, not the crash itself), on August 19, 2001. Both Tony and his father Dean died in racing accidents within 10 months of each other.

Legacy
The Tony Roper Scholarship Fund was founded after Roper's death. As of now, it is still running to this day.

Roper's death would be one of 5 deaths within the span of two years that would lead NASCAR to implement and mandate the HANS device in every single car and driver.

NASCAR
(key) ( Bold – Pole position awarded by qualifying time. Italics – Pole position earned by points standings or practice time. * – Most laps led. )

title: Tony Roper (racing driver)


text:
User:Mjw99

I am a PhD student studying computational chemistry at Imperial College London. I am modelling large biological system using a combination of classical and  quantum methods. I regularly make use of the Molecular Dynamics package AMBER and the quantum mechanical package GAUSSIAN.

http://dumb.ch.ic.ac.uk/~mjw99/

title: User:Mjw99


text:
Glenfield Park, New South Wales

Glenfield Park, or simply 'Glenfield' is a rapidly growing southern suburb of Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, Australia reaching its final stages of development. Glenfield Park's strong residential development is due to its situation so close to the outskirts of the city and availability of relatively flat, cheap land. The suburb is home to the city's first Aldi supermarket and a large shopping centre known as South City Shopping Centre that is home to Wagga's second Coles supermarket.

Streets in Glenfield Park are named after Aboriginal words.

title: Glenfield Park, New South Wales


text:
John Shipley (poker player)

John Shipley is an English professional poker player from Solihull, West Midlands.

Amongst his money finishes at the World Series of Poker (WSOP) are a 7th-place finish in the 2002 $10,000 no limit hold'em main event, where he earned $125,000. He had also finished in the money of the same event at the 2000 WSOP.

Following this, John was invited onto the Late Night Poker television series in its sixth season, but was unable to progress through his heat which featured Ken Lennaárd, Victoria Coren, Tony Bloom, Gary Jones, Dave Ulliott, and Ross Boatman.

In October 2004, Shipley won first place in the European Poker Tour (EPT) London event, taking home £200,000 ($359,479) in winnings.

As of 2008, his total live tournament winnings exceed $820,000.

Shipley plays online poker at PokerStars under the alias "Sapphire1".

title: John Shipley (poker player)


text:
Lújar

Lújar is a village in southern Spain in the Sierra Nevada, a couple of kilometres inland from the coast and the city of Motril along a fairly precipitous road. Its coordinates are 36.7875°N, -3.40139°W (36.7877, -3.4016). Its population is approximately 500.

History
The village was one of the first to be taken during the Spanish Civil War.

Facilities
There is a municipal open air swimming pool at the western end of the village, and a couple of bars.

title: Lújar


text: User talk:80.47.110.144

title: User talk:80.47.110.144


text:
Murmur of the Heart

Murmur of the Heart (Le souffle au cœur) is a 1971 French comedy-drama film written, produced and directed by Louis Malle. It stars Lea Massari, Benoît Ferreux and Daniel Gélin. Written as Malle's semi-autobiography, the film tells a coming-of-age story about a 14-year-old boy (Ferreux) growing up in bourgeois surroundings in post-World War II Dijon, France, with a complex relationship with his Italian-born mother (Massari).

The film was screened at the 1971 Cannes Film Festival and was a box-office success in France. In the United States, it received positive reviews and a nomination for the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay.

Plot
Laurent Chevalier is a 14-year-old boy living in Dijon in 1954 who loves jazz, always receives the highest grades in his class, and opposes the First Indochina War. He has an unloving father, Charles, a gynecologist; an affectionate Italian-born mother, Clara; and two older brothers, Thomas and Marc. Thomas and Marc are inveterate pranksters, while Laurent engages in taboos such as shoplifting and masturbation. Laurent also discovers that Clara has a lover, and upset by the adultery, runs to tell Charles, who, busy with his practice, angrily turns him away.

One night, Thomas and Marc take Laurent to a brothel, where Laurent loses his virginity to a prostitute, Freda, before they are disrupted by his drunken brothers. Upset, Laurent leaves for scouting camp, where he catches scarlet fever and is left with a heart murmur. Bedridden for a month, he is cared for and entertained by Clara and their maid, Augusta. Laurent's teacher at his Catholic school suggests that Laurent's illness has matured him, so that he has made progress in his studies, and urges Clara to treat him more like an adult.

As Laurent requires treatment at a sanatorium, he and Clara check into a hotel. Due to an error by Charles's secretary Solange, the hotel books both Clara and Laurent into a single room, and given that the hotel is completely full, no additional room is available. Laurent takes interest in two young girls at the hotel, Hélène and Daphne, and also spies on his mother in the bathtub. Though Laurent pursues Hélène, Hélène says she is not ready for sex; Laurent accuses her of being a lesbian. Clara temporarily leaves with her lover, but comes back distraught after their breakup; Laurent comforts her. After a night of heavy drinking on Bastille Day, Laurent and Clara have sex. Clara tells him afterward that this incest will not be repeated, but that they should not regret it. Laurent leaves their room, and after unsuccessfully trying to seduce Hélène, spends the night with Daphne.

Production
Malle wrote Murmur of the Heart partly as an autobiography. He said, "My passion for jazz, my curiosity about literature, the tyranny of my two elder brothers, how they introduced me to sex—this is pretty close to home." Malle also suffered from a heart murmur and shared a hotel room with his mother during treatment. Aside from that, the film is fictional, and takes place later than Malle's childhood. The humorous, earthy Italian mother is also a fictional character, based more on a friend's mother than his own. Malle asserted in interviews that the incest, in particular, is fictional. He claimed that in writing the script, he had no intention to include it, but ended up doing so as he explored an intense mother-son relationship.

The National Center of Cinematography objected to the screenplay's erotic scenes. Malle was surprised by the response. With the Censorship Board denying funding, the film was financed with the help of Mariane Film, a French subsidiary of Paramount Pictures. Given his love of jazz, and that Laurent steals a Charlie Parker album at the beginning of the film, Malle used Parker's music for the film score.

Of the incest scene, Massari said, "We shot that scene last and it was a great concern throughout the entire shoot. On the last day Malle said to me, 'do what you want, if it comes out well we'll keep it, if not we'll do as I say.' I acted on instinct, loading the fact that the woman was drunk, and the scene stayed as is."

Release
In France, the film had 2,652,870 admissions. It was screened at the Cannes Film Festival in May 1971 and also played at the New York Film Festival in October 1971.

On its re-release in the United States in 1989, it grossed $1,160,784. In Region 1, The Criterion Collection released the film on DVD in 2006, along with Malle's films Lacombe, Lucien and Au revoir les enfants.

Critical reception
Roger Ebert gave the film a four-star review, comparing it favorably to The 400 Blows, and wrote of the incest that Malle "takes the most highly charged subject matter you can imagine, and mutes it into simple affection." Judith Crist, writing for New York, praised the "remarkable" performances of Lea Massari, Benoît Ferreux and Daniel Gélin. Richard Schickel, writing for Life, said he had a "strange enthusiasm" for the film, which he felt demonstrated "taste, charm and the most winning sentiment." Variety staff complimented Ferreux and Massari's performances. In The New York Times, Roger Greenspun wrote that the film "isn't very good" and "that it could probably have been made with as much distinction by any of those directors, all equally anonymous, who specialize in urban romantic comedy (or tragedy) of a sophistication that is supposed to be peculiarly French." John Simon wrote that Murmur of the Heart treats incest charmingly but unsatisfactorily.

In 1989, Desson Howe wrote in The Washington Post that the film maintained its "fresh intelligence and delicacy" and that "Malle's world of sarcastic, upper-middle-class brats seems to be Murmur's most enduring creation." In 1990, Richard Stengel gave the film an A− in Entertainment Weekly, writing, "Almost everything about this coming-of-age story rings true, and Malle avoids any heavy-handed explanations of family behavior." Critic Pauline Kael called Massari "superb". In his 2002 Movie & Video Guide, Leonard Maltin gives the film three and a half stars, calling it a "fresh, intelligent, affectionately comic tale".

Director Wes Anderson has cited Murmur of the Heart as an influence, saying he loved the characters Laurent and Clara. Of the incest, he said, "The stuff between him and the mother feels more kind of romantic almost—but also taboo and scary in a way, which makes it even more seductive." Director Noah Baumbach has also named the film as an influence. Rotten Tomatoes counted 16 favorable reviews out of 17 for a score of 94%.

Accolades
Murmur of the Heart was nominated for Best Original Screenplay at the 1973 Academy Awards. It was also in competition, in the French part of the official selection, at the 1971 Cannes Film Festival.

title: Murmur of the Heart