text:
User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive5

 * User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive1
 * User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive2
 * User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive3
 * User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive4

Re congratulations
Hello:

Yes, you are correct that I have graduated. I am currently studying for the state bar exam at the end of July, which is why I have not been making many edits recently. After the bar there are several articles which I am looking forward to cleaning up (starting with the mess in Contract and in Tort).

--Coolcaesar 1 July 2005 00:11 (UTC)

Thanks
Thank you for your supportive vote on my RfA. It was much appreciated. And you're right about violists; I haven't met many I haven't liked ;)! Thanks a lot! Gratefully,  Bratsche talk  5 pillars July 1, 2005 01:12 (UTC)

Caption
Thank you for adding a remarkable caption to the photo taken from Islip Saddle. I think there are still many articles can be added for the magnificent San Gabriel Mountains i.e. Mount Baden Powell and Pine Mountain. Moreover, I will add a photo for Santa Monica Mountains tonite since I know you will add a fabulous caption for me. Besides, I owe a long due gratitude for you support to keep the UCLA snow photo, thanks! Geographer July 1, 2005 05:30 (UTC)

 * Pine Mountain? Which one? Neither seems especially notable. Mt Lowe, Mt Waterman, there are some other noteworthy peaks that need attention. We still need to do an article on the Verdugo Mountains. Anyway, thanks for all of your contributions. (and watch out for the anti-snow faction - they may be back in the late fall, using all kinds of methods to remove snow: shovels, salt, even snowplows! They'll stop at nothing.) Cheers, -Willmcw July 1, 2005 20:56 (UTC)

User Wyss and the article on Nick Adams
Could I possibly ask you to have a further look at the Talk:Nick Adams page? As a reply to your comment on this page, User:Wyss has written, "You clearly haven't read that link yourself. Why didn't you bother to check it? Maybe because you're so busy as a new Wikipedia:Admin?" This sounds very similar to flamings by User:Ted Wilkes. See, for instance, his reply to administrator User:Mel Etitis on his talk page: "Yet again I have to request that you read facts and know what you are talking about before commenting. I suggest, since this matter is in the hands of Wikipedia:Mediator Ed Poor, that it might be best for you to refrain from further comments and not interfere in the process." See also this user's attempts at silencing me by repeatedly deleting my posts. Why are users Wyss and Ted Wilkes so keenly interested to suppress every reference that Nick Adams was gay? See also Natalie Wood and Talk:Natalie Wood where the same information taken from a current biography has been deleted by user Wyss. 80.141.243.13 1 July 2005 21:05 (UTC)

 * I think User:Wyss has now violated the three reverts rule, as he has again deleted my contribution to the Natalie Wood page. What is your opinion? 80.141.178.103 3 July 2005 15:13 (UTC)

Alternative Media Project
Hi, Willmcw.

Given the complexity of all the issues and articles involved, I've decided it would be better for me to stay out of it, sorry. If I encounter run across any blanking on his part, I will revert, but chasing after this guy looks like too much work. ;-) Cheers, func (talk) 2 July 2005 01:54 (UTC)

Beastmen
LOL!! Chip Berlet right next to the Queen (dope-pusher). I'm a little disappointed that we've been left out. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 03:50 (UTC)

 * Between her and the "Sleazy-looking Avocado fascist beast-man Peter Camejo, backed by pro-dope globalists such as George Soros, in support of the very same genocidal program as the Cheney-Bush regime." Avocado fascist? That's one for the record books. -Willmcw July 2, 2005 03:55 (UTC)

It seems to refer to the so-called Avocado Declaration, which became avocado fascists. Green on the outside, green on the inside, I think. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 04:52 (UTC)

 * Is this lingo so common throughout the movement than everyone uses these terms? I mean, Lunatic Isaac Newton is not an epithet you hear everyday, and that's the mildest one in the bunch. Anyway, this is a very clear case of promoting LaRouche theories in unrelated articles. Further, the editor exhibits considerable familiarity with Wikipedia along with an similar interests to a banned editor. This editor's contributions have not been NPOV. I think there may be a violation of the ArbCom's HK decision, but I don't have time to pursue it right now. Cheers, -Willmcw July 2, 2005 05:11 (UTC)

 * I agree about the familiarity. When I last heard, David Gerard's check-user facility wasn't available under 1.5, so we may have to ask a developer to check, and they're very busy. Anyway, I'm reverting edits, and if he continues, I'm going to start protecting. I've also left a report here Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. He's objecting to the Bertrand Russell FAC on the grounds that it doesn't say Russell was evil. ;-p SlimVirgin (talk)  July 2, 2005 05:34 (UTC)

 * More than just 'familiarity.' There is a strong similarity in style. If not the same user there may be a guidebook passing around - how to edit on Wiki. But the more likely explanation is that it is the same user. -Willmcw July 2, 2005 06:22 (UTC)

 * A little less controlled than that person, though it could be him on drugs. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 06:23 (UTC)

 * Or more likely, off drugs. Whoever it is, his bizarre edits have gained the attention of many editors. That increased involvement may make it easier to handle similar situations in the future. See, it's all for the good. Cheers, -Willmcw July 3, 2005 06:01 (UTC)

Barnstar
For working around the clock to defend fascism and synarchism, I hereby award you the "rabid dog beast-man Barnstar." Keep up the bestial work. Cognition 2 July 2005 07:22 (UTC)
 * Congrats on adminship, Will! (I was 2nd, remember...) El_C 2 July 2005 08:05 (UTC)
 * LOL! Will's looking particularly rabid tonight. SlimVirgin (talk) July 2, 2005 08:10 (UTC)

Peer review
Hiya! Sorry if I didn't seem gentle enough in noting the bad link (I wasn't trying to be harsh), the single-subject anon has been trying to insert unverified gossip into that article for weeks. Peer-review when it comes to Hollywood people can happen through stuff like a good review in Variety or Billboard, the NYT or Guardian or whatever. The book he cites in this case is widely known as a downmarket tabloid book much invented from whole cloth. The same author's done other sloppy, made-up rip jobs including a bio on Errol Flynn. It doesn't qualify as a source, my use of the term peer review in dealing with this particular anon editor is apt IMHO. Thanks for being interested and we can always talk about it when you want! :) Wyss 2 July 2005 08:42 (UTC)

Mediation
I'm ready and willing to mediate, so let me know when you'd like to get started. Andre ( talk ) July 2, 2005 20:22 (UTC)

 * Anytime that you like. Thanks for volunteering. Cheers, -Willmcw July 2, 2005 20:27 (UTC)

Category:Pseudoscience thoughts
I've been rethinking Category:Pseudoscience along someone different grounds than the common objections. I posted my thoughts to the Wikipedia EN mailing list a few days ago. I'd be interested in your thoughts on this. --Fastfission 2 July 2005 22:24 (UTC)

Formatting
Odd though it may seem, the HTML command is preferred for block quotes. I believe that may be partly due to the way that the right margin is handled, depending also on the CSS being used. How to edit a page. I, too, had "corrected" pages by removing the HTML before being set straight. Thanks for helping out Wikipedia. Cheers, -Willmcw July 3, 2005 01:53 (UTC)
 * Odd indeed. Well, thanks. Have you rolled me back yet? Shinobu 3 July 2005 02:04 (UTC)

 * No. If you'd like to make any other edits go ahead. It's really just a small thing. The right margin on my CSS is ragged so it doesn't even show on my screen. I wouldn't have mentioned it but you seemed to have gone out of your way to make the change. Cheers, -Willmcw July 3, 2005 02:10 (UTC)

Mootstormfront
Hey Will. I've just started this new article about the website, MootStormfront, which is of course an anti-Stormfront discussion forum. I think you should check out Mootstormfront, and probably expand it a little bit more. Regards, --Gramaic 3 July 2005 08:32 (UTC)

Eugenicists
While various people have supported or discussed eugenics favorably, the only people who I would call "eugenicists" as the first entry in their biographies would be those who have practiced eugenics (Davenport), or major theorists (Galton). Folks like Fisher or Fletcher are supporters or minor theorists and their roles as eugenicists are secondary to other occupations. It's tricky because "eugenicist" includes both those who do it and those who just talk about it. What are your thoughts? Cheers, -Willmcw July 4, 2005 22:17 (UTC)

 * Good point and I agree. The latter can have eugenicist listed after their "primary" professions if any, or one can write "a supporter of eugenics" or something similar. Also, because of reports about the Nazi German's activities, a some notable eugenicists have tried to avoid having their names associated with eugenics. Regardless of what is the truth, labeling these people as eugenicists may bring dispute from others who are familiar with the controversy. I have not scrunized some articles to strickly in these regards; there are mistakes which need a NPOV.--AI 5 July 2005 05:46 (UTC)

Déja vu
did this a lot. SlimVirgin (talk) July 5, 2005 07:41 (UTC)

Ah yes, like here. -Willmcw July 5, 2005 08:13 (UTC)

 * And deleted some links about it here . Actually, I wrote s/he did it a lot, but in fact it was only a couple of times now I look at the history. But I remember it was his/her big thing on various talk pages: that Duggan shouldn't be included anywhere in the encyclopedia, either on his own page or elsewhere. S/he called it a "hoax." SlimVirgin (talk) July 5, 2005 08:27 (UTC)

Mediation
There's a difference, will, between simply "looking over one's shoulder" and actively stalking. If you were checking my work on two, three, or four articles of common interest, and myself vice versa, it would be "looking over one's shoulder." Unfortunately your activity extends well beyond the simple checks and balances that entails and includes actively following me around wikipedia to in excess of 50 different articles on topics of all sort and nature. A great many of your attempts to edit my additions are plainly made in bad faith and aimed directly at frustrating, deconstructing, and/or removing them even when they are more than sufficiently sourced per wikipedia guidelines. It is this breach of Wikipedia's good faith assumption that makes stalking problematic, and the hostile environment it produces is why so many editors frown upon the practice. It should also be noted that there is ample precedent on Wikipedia that stalking behavior constitutes "disruptive editing" due to its breach of the good faith assumption including at least one case where an editor was personally blocked by Jimbo Wales for stalking another user with edits that were primarily minor and inconsequential yet exhibited a consistent pattern of specifically following that editor. Per Wales' decision, the stalker "was making a pest of himself by harassing" the other editor. I have addressed these concerns to you directly many times, will. I have explained and documented them in detail, and now I am seeking outside mediation to resolve them. It is unfortunate that we've come this far, but you've been completely unresponsive to my concerns and only intensified your problematic behavior as a response. Thus outside intervention has become the only alternative at this point. Rangerdude 5 July 2005 18:05 (UTC)

 * As I have stated previously, I have basis to doubt that you are editing in good faith built upon the very same stalking behavior that is the subject of this dispute and that is itself a violation of the good faith assumption. The simplest way to restore mutual good faith is to cease the stalking, and if mediation can accomplish that so be it. I favor mediation on this as it was suggested prior to arbitration. What comes next is dependent upon mediation's ability to resolve this dispute, and for that to occur mediation must happen first. Rangerdude 5 July 2005 19:56 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi Will, I just wanted to say thanks for your support of my RfA :-) Craigy (talk) July 5, 2005 20:40 (UTC)

NPOV removal
That's interesting. Thanks for the rules clarification. It just so happens that someone put that tag on an article that I created without discussion. I wish everyone would follow the same guides!

The Phora
Hi Will, take a look at this article. Apparently when I was previosly listing The Phora, in the external links section in White supremacy, I was unaware that I was making history. lol --Gramaic 6 July 2005 05:45 (UTC)

 * Do you think you can clean it up? I'll support you. Cheers, -Willmcw July 6, 2005 06:39 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. By the way, I've just tried to go to home page of The Phora, and for some reason the sight isn't coming up. Are you having the same problem accessing the Phora? If the sight is gone, that means it would be best if the article gets deleted. --Gramaic 6 July 2005 07:37 (UTC)

 * The other guys on the VfD mention that too. Websites go up and down. Especially marginal ones. &amp;amp;quot;Nationalist" sites seem to get hacked a lot. But sure, as a former website it is even less notable. Cheers, -Willmcw July 6, 2005 07:48 (UTC)
 * Like you said in your summary, we should wait at least a couple of days. If the sight isn't up by then, I think we should change our vote to "Delete." What do you think? Regards, --Gramaic 6 July 2005 08:16 (UTC)
 * I agree. From the looks of that article, it might almost be easier to start over from scratch should we feel we need an article on it. Cheers, -Willmcw July 6, 2005 08:29 (UTC)

Trial by fire
I guess you found out: it's not easy being an Administrator. Well, if you need any help, don't hesitate to call. You're not the Lone Ranger - anyway, he's fictional ;-) - so ask the other admins for help. Uncle Ed July 7, 2005 00:31 (UTC)

 * "No big deal" indeed. Thanks for your suggestion. Cheers, -Willmcw July 7, 2005 00:55 (UTC)

3rd opinion in Christian Exodus concerning SPLC
You are pretty well versed in the SPLC subject. Please add your opinion to the talk in Christian Exodus on my current edit.

Regards,

Guy Montag 7 July 2005 01:40 (UTC)

Eugenics
Thanks for your input on the talk page, I appreciated and agreed with it. Wyss 7 July 2005 21:49 (UTC)

We've got a live one
User:Wanker001 has uploaded a "new" Defender of the Wiki barnstar that displays either as the normal barnstar or as a pornographic image, depending on whether it is displayed on a user page as a thumb or frame. I'm letting you know since you're an admin and can revert/block, and also because your user page is one of the ones affected. Kaibabsquirrel 8 July 2005 01:12 (UTC)
 * In fact it always displayed as a pornographic image; clear your cache when you find an image vandalism which shows only on thumbs (or only on full size). --cesarb 8 July 2005 01:34 (UTC)
 * Okay I found that out - by switching browsers. (Opera's clear cache function doesn't always work right...) Thanks for the speedy revert CesarB. Kaibabsquirrel 8 July 2005 01:50 (UTC)

Rick Ross
Hi, Will. Would you take a look at Rick Ross? I have made substantial edits, and would like your opinion if you think it needs some NPOV editing (although I tried my best to substantiate with references and citations, another pair of eyes will certainly help). Thanks. --Zappaz 8 July 2005 04:50 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the gracious offer. I fixed some spelling and will make another review. The criticism section does seem a bit long, as not all entries are criticisms. Maybe we should split it off into "Criticism of Rick Ross". ;) Cheers, -Willmcw July 8, 2005 05:05 (UTC)

VfD regarding The Phora
Hi Will. It's already been two days, and The Phora sight is still down. Just to let you know ahead of time, I'm going to change my vote from Keep, to Delete. Again, thanks for the support you offered me. Regards, --Gramaic | Talk 8 July 2005 07:22 (UTC)

Biff Rose
concerning Biff Rose. Don't tell me about Biff Rose. Or that the website I linked is derogatory, IT's his website, email him. He'll tell you. Loser. I'll have you banned. Idiot
 * unsigned comment from user:Jonah Ayers

Clay Aiken
Whew, thanks for that. Maybe we can actually get somewhere now. Although, I just looked at the article; it has the protected tag, but I can still hit edit? Not sure what that's about. Anyway, thanks again. · Katefan0(scribble) 22:15, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

 * My first protection. Sorry for not seeing your request sooner. Good luck. -Willmcw 22:26, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

ExxonMobil
Hiya! There's a question on Talk:ExxonMobil as to why ExxonMobil is in Category:Climate change organizations, and I was wondering if you might like to pop by and say a couple of words, since you added it to the category. Cheers! —Stormie 22:39, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the heads up. I've responded there. Cheers, -Willmcw 22:54, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Need update
Dear Willmcw,

Can you tell me what needs to be done next as to the editing of the Aesthetic Realism article? Things seem to have stalled. Should I write a comprehensive article using the various edits that have been suggested? --Aperey 17:14, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Cognition
So who are Charlie McCarthy and Mortimer Snerd? ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 04:35, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * See also: Edgar Bergen. -Willmcw 04:40, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * Here's an interesting contribution: false edit summary, flowery language, link to HK's webpage, Los Angeles IP. . -Willmcw 02:10, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

List of White supremacists
Hi Will. Thanks for the invitation to Nationalist Movement, I've put it in my watchlist and I'll work on it when I can. Anyway, of course you know by know as evidenced in Talk:White supremacy, I started a new article that is a list of all white supremacists. What do you think of this article, because I've noticed that some people are referring to it as highly POV. Do you think I should put up a VfD tag on List of White supremacists? Thanks, --Gramaic | Talk 05:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln
I'm curious. The addition by the anon was, I think, factually correct: Wilkes did make a point of timing his shot to go along with the laughter following the "Sockdologizing man-trap" line. Or no? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 21:11, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * You are right, my mistake. "Sock" has come to have a special meaning on Wikipedia and I made a hasty assumption about its use. Thanks for catching it. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:15, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

Sockpuppet
So how did I come to be your sockpuppet? Oh well...what's my next assignment, Master? Guettarda 23:52, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * BTW - nice dress Guettarda 23:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * It was one of my proudest moments: being accused  of being your sockpuppet.  I am honored!  Btw it does look a little like me.  Hope to see you on the 25th!  (Oh, never mind, that's right, I'll already be there... ) Antandrus  (talk) 02:21, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Aiken
No, I really think it's premature to lift the protection at this point, and here's why. For now the hostile editors have mostly gone dormant (they were primarily Miklos Szabo and what I suspect to be his sockpuppet, Marie Laveux). Some of the editors that came in because of whatever forum or blog comment seem to have gone away though it's hard to tell since the article's protected. But I think that it's important to have the agremeent of Jmh because he/she is representative of the community that's basically started the edit war over this, so I think whatever final agreement we come to should have his or her imprimatur. Maybe then Jmh can help us revert the inevitable drive-bys, or spread wikilove throughout the Aiken forums, I don't know. But I do think it's a bit premature. Soon, though, I feel like we're coming up on an agreement. As for your comments, I welcome them to be quite honest... you were right, and I had the same misgivings, so I'm glad you mentioned them. Please keep this one on your watchlist... · Katefan0(scribble) 04:12, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Shared IPs
Please don't block shared IPs (such as 217.33.74.20) for 24 hours as it prevents many registered users from making edits too. If a block is required please just limit it to an hour at the most.

 * Pardon my error. How do I determine which IPs are shared? Thanks, -Willmcw 10:45, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * They usually have the sharedip tag at the top, showing the box. Cheers, violet/riga (t) 10:53, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The question remains: on the basis of what can such a conclusion/template be arrived at/inserted. El_C 12:32, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

Fair use
I don't know if Image:NZNF with banner small.jpg is related to the above. I created it as a smaller version of another photo because the Fair Use was being challenged. One of the fair use criteria is that the image be reproduced at a lower resolution. Is there a specific reason that you don't think the fair use challenge was sincere or that we can reproduce the image at full resolution and still claim fair use? The discussion spread across many different talk pages, so it'd take me a little while to find all the previous discussions on this image, but I'd be happy to do so if you'd like to review them. Thanks, -Willmcw 20:20, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I didn't realize it had been discussed. Personally I think the large version is sufficiently small (only 2 inches wide on a 300dpi printer!) that it's okay.  If you disagree, feel free to change the two pages that use the image back.

 * By the way, I notice you've uploaded a bunch of great photos. It would be wonderful if you'd put them at the Commons instead!  dbenbenn | talk 20:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * If you think the image is sufficiently degraded at full size then that is good enough for me. I'll copy any extra fair use claim language to the larger image. Thanks for the compliment on the photos. I hadn't really though much about the difference between WP and the Commons. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:01, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Biff Rose
Hey, in regards to Biff Rose, I think that your deisre to be the lead man on this is weird, but because of that, you've put a little too much extraneous information and left out the real meat of the subject. Go to the first few posts. And suss out the real deal regarding rose, how he drifted into obscurity, and is relatively unknown now, trying to kick start a career retrospective despite tangles with law enforcement which for some reason are not inlcuded in any of the reports you are 'responsible' for.

Instead of aimless meanderings about who covered Molly, it may be betteer served to write about how his songs were covered by, and then lsit those people. If you can't get succinct, then you are certainly not a writer of worth, and the details you keep in the report are innocuous and relatively numbing.

Keep trying. You'll get there, if you stop trying to be the man.

 * I am the man. Who are you and why do you care about obscure Biff Rose? If you have any sourced information then go ahead and add it. Unsourced allegations about supposed criminal activities are libels and are not suitable for an encyclopedia. Thanks, -Willmcw 22:02, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

Page for Deletion
Willmcw, you are good at Wiki stuff--you should see this page and see if you agree it is a vanity/non-notable page that ought to be deleted: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Tom_G._Palmer Nskinsella 19:02, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Your flower
Seeing that was a very nice way to start the day. Thank you. ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 16:23, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Will. Once again I need your advice. "You da man."

Could you, and some others like SlimVirgin, take a look at my exchange with Sam Spade (see user talk:Sam Spade and user talk:Ed Poor). I think he needs a wiki-break, because of incessant failure to adhere to NPOV - maybe even a block.

But lately, I'm hesitant about being unilateral. Some perspective would help. Uncle Ed 00:56, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

 * I admire your patience and diligence in this matter. You are right to avoid unilateral action. Beyond simple persuasion are the other dispute resolution mechanisms that you are familiar with. Although I think that editors from many perspectives share a respect for Sam Spade's contributions, many editors also share a concern about his continued difficulty in maintaining NPOV and civility. Let's keep trying to work towards civil, NPOV, collaborative editing. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:53, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

User:Crosstar
I'd already been reverting his shameless spamming of dubious links. Look at this egregious example at Andrew Goodman:  It links to a made-up conversation with Goodman's mother which has to be read to be believed. Jayjg (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Oh, and Crosstar appears to have been permanently blocked by another admin (besides your block). Jayjg (talk) 04:11, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Votes for deletion/List of White supremacists
Hey Will, I'd like you to check this out. Regards, --Gramaic | Talk 05:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

TitleDisputed TfD
How can the Conspiracy theory majority vote against "conspiracy theory" pejoratively titled articles be used as evidence that there isn't a legitimate title neutrality dispute? More than 10 voted against, which should be plenty to prove there is no consensus. Why didn't anyone complain about TitleDisputed itself until now? What about the point that {NPOV-title} is too general and includes too many unspecific "non title" possibilities, not to mention it is worded poorly? In your vote you said "its [{TitleDisputed}'s] use has been discussed at some length previously", that means we should delete it? All discussion centered around the appropriateness of adding the template to an article, not over the template itself. zen master T 10:30, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Too many thousands of words have already been expended on this general topic. I've added my vote to the TfD, as have you. I'm not going to change your vote, and you're probably not going to change mine either. That's ok. Cheers, -Willmcw 10:48, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Hugo Heyrman
Hi Will,

I noticed your comment that there was a copyright problem with the Hugo Heyrman. Did you see the talk page? I spent a bit of time clarifying the potential copyvio with Dr. Hugo, so he added a statement that he was the original author and as such his edits would be GFDL. -- Solipsist 11:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, excellent. My brain got so tangled up trying to follow the name changes, etc, that I lost track of what I'd just seen on the talk page. Thanks for taking the time to clearing that up, then and now. Cheers, -Willmcw 11:58, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Kevin B. MacDonald articles
The question has arisen as to why there are two articles; you might want to respond at Talk:The Culture of Critique series. Jayjg (talk) 17:39, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Heraclius 3rr revert breach

 * 1st revert
 * 2nd revert
 * 3rd revert
 * 4th revert

Clear cut breach of policy.

Regards,

Guy Montag 04:36, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I've given him a warning and if he reverts again I'll block him. -Willmcw 04:51, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * On second thought, I see he was previously warned. I'll block him for 24 hours -Willmcw 04:55, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

See earlier on the list:

Three revert rule violation on Palestinian terrorism (history · watch). Guy Montag (talk • contribs):

* Previous version reverted to: [DiffLink Time] * 1st revert: [9] * 2nd revert: [10] * 3rd revert: [11] * 4th revert: [12]

Reported by:Heraclius 02:49, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

As an Admin you are obliged by the rules to treat both parties equally. I hope you will do so please. 62.253.64.15 06:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * If you are Heraclius please don't use an IP as a sockpuppet. That violates your block. -Willmcw 07:20, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * I can assure you I am not a sockpuppet - I agree that would be bad. On a different topic doesn't the revert (to me by Guy on Tali Hatuel) below break some sort of policy too?

 * (cur) (last) 02:03, 19 July 2005 Guy Montag m (fuck off)
 * (cur) (last) 22:14, 18 July 2005 62.253.64.14

 * 62.253.64.14 17:26, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Personal attacks are against the no personal attacks policy. However admins are not empowered to block simply for violations of that policy. Other routes which can handle personal attack violations are requests for comment and requests for arbitration. -Willmcw 21:44, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your reply on this. I shall not be pursueing this any further, nor would I have any interest in so doing. I provided it (along with the evidence of gloating over the other users block) more by way of illustration that this had got out of hand. 62.253.64.14 22:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Camillafop
What did you have in mind willmcw? I figured out how to undo some deleted material, none of it seemed a problem, I couldn't understand why it was deleted. Camillafop 09:22, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * WP:Cite and WP:NPOV. Please read them carefully. -Willmcw 09:45, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

3RR
Thank you for your constructive criticism of my "treatment of jerks" :). I will do my best to tolerate them more than I do now. And yes, I have made a complaint on the noticeboard.

Regards,

Guy Montag 17:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I hope you note that he has also done a 4th revert in 24 hours (disguised under an inaccurate edit summary) on Iman Darweesh Al Hams coupled with a taunt about the other users "block" - he's clearly making a sport of this. 62.253.64.14 18:33, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Will, if you take a closer look you will see that those are edits on two seperate days. The person who reported me has been blocked many times for consistently breaking policy.

Guy Montag 21:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * If this referring to me then please note that I have NEVER been blocked for violating policy. 62.253.64.14 22:32, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Good to see you being even handed on this one
As a gesture of good faith I'm going to back away from editing for a few days to let tempers cool a little. Many thanks. 62.253.64.14 20:32, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Well it would have been - had you been even handed. "short ban" - a lovely "weasel word" there. 62.253.64.15

 * Please see above for the reasons I gave "Lifeisunfair." Yes, an hour is a "slap on the wrist." The reason for the 3RR block is to break a cycle of reverting that can develop, usually between two editors. To block someone for an editing series that occured days previously is simply punitive, and that is not the point of the block. I realize that this editor is not always collaborative and sometimes makes personal attacks, but it is not within my capacity as administrator to do anything about that. Feel free to raise this in other forums the next time there's a problem-you may find other admins with different views.  -Willmcw 07:56, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Revote On Kinsella
You nominated Stephan Kinsella for deletion. Mr. Kinsella recreated the page about himself. I renominated it. If would like to vote again the page is: Kinsella 2 --RyanKoppelman 21:37, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Is a staff listing necessary for James Hahn?
Do you feel a staff listing is encyclopedic or necessary for the James Hahn article? Hall Monitor 21:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

User:Guy Montag
Guy Montag reverted the the Palestinian terrorism article five times in a 24-hour period, and has done so an additional four times since then.

This individual was blocked for violating the 3RR on three prior occasions, so I feel that a one-hour block is insufficient. —Lifeisunfair 00:38, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, Lifeisundfair, you are right and I'm sure that the next time he does that he will receive a longer "time-out". (I just hope another admin gets the chore.) In this instance I chose 1 hour because it was already an old case, because the handling of NPOV tags is disputable and sometimes repeatedly removing/adding one can be viewed as vandalism, because neither party has clean hands, and because it'd be off my plate that much sooner. Please know that we do not impose these blocks as true "penalties", but rather as ways of trying to interrupt a bad editing behavior by giving the editor a chance to step away from the conflict. -Willmcw 00:45, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

All of this type of actions sends out out a message though. And yours is that being a bully, telling people to "fuck off", repeatedly breaching a 3RR and then reporting another usrs for the SAME violation - is all better than if you are (as you described Heraceus earlier) "a jerk" because of your POV. What a shame. 62.253.64.15 06:58, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * There's lots of jerks on the Internet. Unfortunately there is no remedy in the Wikipedia toolbox to cure them. Do you think 2 hours or 24 hours or 48 hours is going to change that? Maybe, maybe not. Anyway, this isn't a popularity contest - we're just here to write an encyclopedia. Write concise, comprehensive summaries in an NPOV manner using verifiable sources. If you ever have a specifically sourced edit that you think has been improperly removed, then come to me and I'll look into it. If you want to whine about blocks then go to someone else. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:16, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

VfD
FYI Votes for deletion/Perverted-Justice.com SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 01:01, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks
I guess we're both a bit late in voting - but better late than never for a good policy. Thanks for leading me to it. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:46, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the support. I know you probably have been watching my actions and I know I have been very uncivil with personal attacks. I will do my best to refrain from any personal comments in article talk pages.  If I have a personal dispute with someone, I will make sure to word my comments/suggestions/criticisms/etc to a user's talk page very carefully so they are not attacks. Also, I was hoping I wasn't violating any wikipolicies in my signing because I also voted on some surveys that seem months old.  Thank you for your patience with me. Aloha --AI 09:59, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you again for your second response. I do not see anything you wrote as personally against to me. Aloha --AI 17:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Spoken articles
I just wanted to say that I've been listening and re-listening to a lot of your spoken articles and that I really love your voice. I don't know what it is about it in particular, but I keep on consciously noticing how much I enjoy hearing it and reminding myself to write this message. This is especially true with the history of the world article. I hope you do some more spoken articles --Clngre 14:30, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Stephan Kinsella
...is basically a recreation of previously deleted material, and is presently written by its own subject. Several people have already noted in the VFD debate that this would be speedily deletable (not to mention a severe case of WP:VAIN, WP:POINT and WP:WORLD for Stephan). Since you undeleted the page history I was wondering if you'd agree. Yours, Radiant_ >|< 17:22, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes to all of the above. -Willmcw 17:35, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * PS, while the article could qualify for speedy, now that the VfD is in full flower we should let it proceed. -Willmcw 17:58, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

 * Not necessarily - speedy deletion trumps VFD. Especially given the way people are badgering the vote now. But I'll leave that to your discretion and simply vote to delete it. Radiant_ >|< 19:18, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * The prior nomination as well as a related nomination (Tom G. Palmer) have been marked by voting by brand-new users, some apparently following blog links. That hasn't happened on this article's VfD yet, but I see that the subject has now posted a link from his blog. But the VfD process can handle that. Cheers, -Willmcw 19:35, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Jacques Hébert (Canadian politician)
Hi,

I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to explain why you removed the Nobel peace prize sentence from this article. I appreciate the explanation.

--YUL89YYZ 18:48, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Processing copyvios
Hi Willmcw, your assumptions are mostly correct (also, see the instructions at the top of WP:CP);
 * 1) verify the copyvio
 * 2) revert to the oldest version of the article with no copyright violation -or- if the article started as a copyvio then delete. Most listings get deleted

We can leave copyvios in history if it's possible to revert to an earlier, copyvio-free version. However, we will remove the offending history if the copyright owner requests it (by deleting the article and restoring only the clean versions of history). This is very difficult for articles with long edit histories.

I find that a significant number of listings are mistakes, probably more than one percent; entries from the 1911 EB (PD), or the Catholic Encyclopedia (PD), or mirrors that don't credit us (they are violating our copyrights), etc.

When an author gives permission for Wikipedia to use their work- I usually ask that they reply to an email, sent to the contact address on the copied website, acknowledging a GFDL license. I include links to Wikipedia's copyright information. Legitimated claims are almost always replied to promptly. If the author is a registered wikipedian with some history I'll take their word for it.

What helps me the most is Firefox browser. I open a few listed articles in their own windows. And then, in each new window open the talk, history, referred url... in tabs. This keeps all the information for a listing together.

I haven't been doing much here for about two months (due to work) but am starting to get some free time again. We definitely need more admins working this page and I'm sure your efforts there will be appreciated. --Duk 23:02, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Mises vs SPLC
That is very interesting, and I won't pretend I know or understand any details. SPLC is not without controversy, as the article states (but I do admit Morris Dies heart is in the right place, despite having his head up his culu). At first glance it looks like the Mises Institute trashed SPLC in 1998 or 2000 with this, so the SPLC retaliated by calling them a hate group. Just a theory. Thanks. nobs 23:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

The Appearance of inconsistency
While wandering around Wikipedia today I found the following entry by you on the talk page of List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people:

 * "Al Reynolds, husband of Star Jones (of "The View") No source for this. This type of material, especially about people who are not widely and commonly known as gay or bi, should have some kind of reference, please. Cheers, -Willmcw 23:06, Mar 28, 2005 (UTC)"

Now everyone I know thinks Reynolds is gay, and I'm not being disingenuous about this. However, I guess we need a source for that, so I googled "Al Reynolds" "gay" and got 3,680 hits as opposed to 15,900 for "Al Reynolds" unmodified. That's around 23.2%. Is the percentage of 25% you cited on the Aiken talk page a more persuasive figure for "sourcing" speculation? I'm astounded that you went out of your way to ask that the speculation be removed in one case, and out of your way to make sure speculation remained in the other. Your criterion is apparently "widely known to Willmcw." The speculation about Reynolds is rampant; you must have missed it. I've heard the jokes by comedians, seen the blogs and internet gossip.

I do not believe that unsubstantiated speculation about sexual orientation belongs in an encyclopedia; apparently you don't either, or do you? I'm confused. I'm not questioning that speculation about Aiken exists; I'm saying that there is no reliable source beyond this speculation: there's nothing but gossip, sterotyping, and a bunch of bad jokes. Jliberty's rationale in "history" for removing a prior speculative entry from the Aiken page: "speculation and stereotypical behavior is not enough to add to an encyclopedia." You might also want to look at Jliberty's rationale on the talk page of List of Famous Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual people under "Debated Section Issues," as it is based around Aiken as an example of someone who should not be listed. He makes very similar arguments to some that I made on the Aiken talk page; how I wish I had found this sooner! I know you are familiar with the page, as your contributions are all over it! Do you disagree with Jliberty about speculation as a source? (I haven't read the entire page; it's long, contentious, and complex.) Actually, now that I read some of your entries, it appears that your argument is that a citation in the Wikipedia entry justifies addition to the list: Wikipedia becomes a source. Are you planning to use the results of the dispute you just participated in to add Aiken to the "debated" list as well?

I also learned today through the "history" of the Aiken entry that the current round of controversy began when another (post Jliberty deletion) "gay speculation" passage was added by an anonymous IP who was never to be seen again. It was removed that day by another anon IP, who replaced it with a smart remark about Aiken being "hawt." Those comments were then reverted to the first version as "vandalism," while the other drive-by entry remained and was protected with vehemence from then on by various editors, none of whom appear to have ever made a substantive contribution to that entry before or since.

"History" on Wikipedia is a fascinating thing, and the much-touted neutrality is looking mighty questionable to me. I think it is all about who argues best, and last. -Jmh123 04:15, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you'll have to search long and hard to find any names that I've added to the List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people. My time on that article is chiefly spent removing names of people spuriously added, like Prince Albert II of Monaco. I personally don't know a thing about Al Reynolds, never seen or heard of him outside the context of the article. But the standard, now voted on and approved, is that anyone with an entry in the article needs to have an article which clearly describes their orientation. Reynolds didn't pass that test, so I removed his name and made a comment on the talk page. I'm not sure what the problem is. Do you think we should include that type of stuff without references? Or just based on rumors? I don't. The case of Aiken is different. I am not familiar wth the history of the Aiken article-I only got involved because of the edit war, and I've never edited it. There are three sourced, verifiable assertions in the new paragraph on that topic, as I recall: that he has denied rumors, that he joked about it on SNL, and that there's a forum devoted to the topic. To my mind none of those would be even close to sufficient to include Aiken on the list. Anyway, I'm not sure if you had a question and if I've answered it. Let me know if I can clarify anything. -Willmcw 04:31, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * PS, regarding the incidence of gay rumors about Aiken, the Google numbers give a reason to mention the rumors, but numbers are not references themselves. If Reynolds has hundreds of rumors about him being gay then maybe an editor should mention it in the article if they can find a proper source, like him denying the rumors. -Willmcw 04:37, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for responding. No I don't think you should include "that type of stuff" without references!  The case of Aiken is only different because people who want to "out" him when he might not even be "in" found a way to introduce the speculation into his entry.  Were I interested, I could probably find instances of engagement with the rumors by Reynolds, but I have absolutely no desire to do so.   Sorry for misinterpreting your role - this place is just one big mess of confusion for a newbie, especially someone who came into it under the circumstances I did. No one involved in the edit war had ever edited the Aiken entry, except for reverting disputed parts and fixing a few very minor bits of punctuation, misspelling, and the like.  Post-war, I'm the only one to make any substantive contribution to it so far.

 * You answered my biggest question, which is that you don't plan to add Aiken to the list. I hope you would also oppose if someone else did.  Another perception I have seems confirmed by your response: that the articles' "editors," who are self-appointed, are the ultimate authority. I guess that's the idea of Wikipedia, but it allows for a lot of inconsistency from entry to entry.  -Jmh123 07:18, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Sure, we're all the judges of our own behavior, and each other's. This is a self-governing place. Regarding the list, the criteria that we established (a mention in the subject's biography) means that those editors interested in that person would have the opportunity to discuss, include, or exclude the information. That makes it much easier for those of us maintaining the list because the matter can be dicussed elsewhere, by those who care and are knowledgeable. The editors involved can decide upon how to handle sexual orientation issues of their subjects. So, in essence, it is the decision of the editors working on the bios, not the editors of the list, that determine if a particular person is included. Anyway, if you need help with anything, let me know. Cheers, -Willmcw 07:41, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks. So I need to direct some of my frustration at those editors who were actually working on this entry up until April of this year.  So it goes.  It could've turned out a lot worse than it did; I'm reasonably satisfied with the result, though it wasn't at all my preference. I can't say that I enjoyed the experience; probably not the best way for one who isn't fond of conflict to be introduced to Wiki-ways.  I appreciate your response. Cheers back atcha, -Jmh123 09:26, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Deletionism
While there is a time and a place for deletions, as with any autoimmune system, too much of a good thing can lead to disorder. After reviewing the link you provided, it looks like it may be Braun or one of his supporters who added his link to the Neurodiversity article, so deletion may well be deserved. On the other hand, a battle over the link to the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health seems to have triggered an undeserved series of VfDs, for Holonomic brain theory, Elliott Valenstein, Moral compass, and Thought police. Please, could you review the articles, their histories, and their VfD discussions, and as an admin weigh in with your opinion? Ombudsman 02:54, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Crosstar (the user and the article)
Thanks for the clarification about his/her track record. I'd seen some of it, but for whatever reason he/she is content to continuously blank that single image out now. I'm tempted to just point that article at the Nationalist Movement and put that it was inspired by the Arrow Cross... but no, that's not Wikiquette.

By the way, could you remove one of the previous incarnations of Kittens.jpg... Its the first change after the original upload. Thanks -Schrei 08:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * As for the Crosstar symbol: that is exactly what we should do. We don't have to say that it was inspired by the Arrow Cross, just that they look alike. (It sure doesn't look like one of Betsy Ross's five-pointed stars). It isn't notable enough to have its own page, and I frankly doubt that all of the history is exactly correct (since he's the only source we don't know). As for user:Crosstar, I see he stopped in to vote to delete the
 * Regarding the "Kittens" - deleted. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:48, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

 * At what point is it safe to just go ahead with the merge? Wikipedia is democratic, but we're the only two people who seem concerned enough to say anything. In terms of democracy, our voter turnout is worse than a US presidential election. I think we won, now let's think like the president: User:Crosstar attacked us, so therefore you need to block User:أسامة بن محمد بن عود بن لادن. -Schrei 11:33, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * There's no particular hurry for the merge. It's a housekeping-type issue. My basic concerns with it have been the POV/verifiability issue, and the self-promotion issue. Both can be addressed without a merge. In general, if additional input on article is sought there are ways of generating interest, an official way being to file a request for comment, which asks other editors to give their opinions. Regarding the user:Crosstar, he was willfully and repeatedly breaking our core policies to the detriment of the project. Blocks serve two chief purposes: to give an editor a "time-out" in order to encourage them towards less problematic behavior, and to protect the encyclopedia from further mischief. Except in special cases they are temporary and usually short. If he wants to return and contribute sourced, NPOV material in accord with the community policies then he'll welcome back. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:54, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

contributions, general discussion, and help
Willmcw, as a fairly green Wikipedian, could you please help w/ the following? 1. Is there a general place here for editors to talk and ask questions? Such as the following-- 2. You have a list of your contributions--articles started, articles contributed too. do you have to manually enter that or is there some automatic way of seeing or listing that? Thanks, Normie. Stephan Kinsella 15:47, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

 * 1. The Village Pump, accessed through the Community Portal. 2. The page is created manually. "My contributions" lists all edits. -Willmcw 16:41, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ummm, the "Community Portal"...?

Rick Ross
I would appreciate your help on the 3RR violation by anon on Rick Ross. Thanks. --ZappaZ 00:37, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I see that he's just been warned. If he makes another rervert let me know and I'll give a block. -Willmcw 00:40, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * He just did. --ZappaZ [[Image:Yin_yang.svg|12px]] 00:43, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * As far as I can tell, that was prior to the warning. 00:33, July 23, 2005 revert versus  00:39, 23 July 2005 warning. -Willmcw 00:45, July 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks. If you could, please restore the version we were working on. I have already used by my three reverts. Thanks. --ZappaZ [[Image:Yin_yang.svg|12px]] 00:53, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Illegal Immigration
I'd be okay with redirecting the "illegal immigrant" article to the "Illegal immigration" article. I'm not really working on it anymore. Sorry.

Hinduism
Unfortunately my knowledge here is close to none. mikka (t) 20:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Shehzad Tanweer
Will, do you have an interest in giving a third opinion about the introduction to this article on one of the London bombers? I feel the intro should include that he was one of four bombers carrying out a joint mission and the number who died overall. User:Sherurcij feels this is POV, and that we should refer only to the number of people Tanweer killed directly. He also feels the intro shouldn't include the CCTV image of the bombers because it's POV. Here is my intro with one pic or here with two pics. Here is Sherurcij's. There is some discussion on Talk:Shehzad Tanweer. I value your intuitions about the NPOV policy and so would appreciate your opinion (but if you don't have time, don't worry). SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 01:38, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * I've added it to my watchlist. I read over the article and the talk page and it looks ok as of now. I'll keep an eye on it. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:49, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

JEM
i kinda want to remain anonymous here in terms of RL stuff. people i know don't use wik but i personally wanted to delete my comment there. J. Parker Stone 02:46, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Just say you're an interested party. That's all that's relevant. -Willmcw 08:02, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

Karl Rove
Could you help with a problem on this page? User:Stevertigo froze the page a few days ago over an apparent 3RR dispute, but he seems to have gone AWOL (on this and other pages which are waiting for unfreezing). If you look at the Talk page for Karl Rove, you will see a lot of good faith efforts to solve the problems. But User:Stevertigo is nowhere to be found! The page, unfortunately, is becoming stale. Can you help? 68.1.168.96 13:57, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

 * It appears that another admin has removed the protection already. I've added it to my watchlist. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:51, July 24, 2005 (UTC)

LvMI
The page did need some sprucing up. It certainly is fair to have more descriptive material than criticism, and I think the page is moving in that direction, but with better edits by the LvMI fans.--Cberlet 22:39, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Slurs
I added most of them after a conversation with Dante (I think) a few months ago. The new one, "tac-tac head" is new to me - it looks like it was written by a Trini (since "tac-tac" is a large black ant) but I don't think it is very widely used. Slang expressions arise quickly, and usually have a short life-span. I would probably delete it as non-notable. Guettarda 05:05, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

WP policy violations
Will - Over the past several days you have repeatedly misrepresented the attempts of myself and several other editors to remind you of Wikipedia policies and guidelines that conflict with your edits as "personal attacks" on you. On the Ludwig von Mises Institute talk page, where many of the efforts to inform you of the Wikipedia policies you have violated were posted, you have also asserted that such corrections should not be made there, falsely accused persons who have criticized your editing behavior of making "personal attacks," and generally ignored any and all attempts to calmly and rationally inform you of the problems many of your edits there are producing in light of Wikipedia's written policies and guidelines. Please be aware that Wikipedia has explicit policies and guidelines for a reason, and that you are repeatedly being directed to them on the LVMI talk page and in other articles because a large number of your edits there are highly problematic when considered in light of them. Informing you of this with an appropriate link, asking that you rectify it, and asking that you cease in your attempts to reinsert materials that violate WP standards is not a "personal attack" on you as an editor, but rather an attempt to bring your edits into compliance with the appropriate policies. Please do not mischaracterize these critiques of your edits as "personal attacks" and please cease and desist in your misrepresentation of myself and the other editors who have corrected you for your edits in order to bring them into compliance with Wikipedia policies. I would also appreciate it if you would abstain from making these false insinuations and allegations on both the article talk page and my personal talk page. While making note of WP policy violations in another's edits and urging him to stop those violations is not a personal attack, falsely labelling another editor with such allegations could reasonably be construed as the very same. Thank you for your attention to these matters. Rangerdude 18:47, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for bring this to my user talk page. Discussing editors is not a good use of article talk pages. "Personal critique", call it what you like, it does not belong there. I do not believe that I have violated any Wikipedia polices or guidelines in any of my edits, much less in a "large number of them." I view this as a long attack, not a specific citation of polcies:
 *  It should also be noted that your editing activities on this and other related articles are becoming increasingly disruptive and irresponsible. Each are characterized by a common theme of attempting to (1) prop up material from persons and organizations that share your personal political point of view and (2) dismantle, belittle, or smear material from persons and organizations that disagree with your personal politics through blatantly POV guilt-by-association and original research tactics, excessive and unreasonable citation demands that exceed anything required by wikipedia itself, arbitrary, politically motivated, and inconsistently applied source screening, and an all around pattern of generally disruptive, harassing, and deconstructive behavior in violation of both the spirit and letter of wikipedia's anti-disruptive, civility, don't bite the newbies, assume good faith, and WP:POINT policies and guidelines. Given this recurring problem, you should seriously consider taking a break from this article until you can contribute in a more responsible, less disruptive, and more NPOV manner. -
 * This littany of offenses that you charge with, giving no specifics whatsoever, is one of the negative personal comments that you have been making. However even more explicit are the numeorus times that you've called me a "wikistalker". That is a clear personal attack. -Willmcw 20:17, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * This passive/aggressive baloney from Rangerdude is tiresome. He now rules the LvMI page with an iron fist, in a perfect echo of the undemocratic elitist arrogance of the Institute he fawns over. The iron first in the velvet glove--the perfect metaphor.--Cberlet 21:25, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Glad to see you are objective and non-biased, Cberlet. Shouldn't your obvious bias disqualify you from making any changes to the Mises page? Stephan Kinsella 18:56, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

 * That's not the way Wikiepdia works. -Willmcw 18:59, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

L.A. Meetup Reminder
Don't forget! L.A's first Wiki meetup is TONIGHT at 7:30 at Philippe's in Downtown. Check out the meetup page for details. See you there! (If you can't make it, come to the next one! - Eric 22:00, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

 * No worries about not making the first one - it went very well. Help me make the second one even bigger and better.  How about a Jimbo Wales lookalike contest?  : )    Hope you feel better - Eric 23:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

It's your turn ...
... to need the flower. SlimVirgin <sup style="color:purple;">(talk) 11:01, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Sir, I just got back from a trip and got an email from a student that a Wikipedia entry on me had been vandalized by a user named "Rothbard," who seems remarkably similar to Mr. Justin Raimondo (author of a biography of Murray Rothbard) and who added a link to a rather slanderous piece by Raimondo mischaracterizing my views (which linked only to itself, not to anything I had ever written or said). (The mischaracterization was carried on into "Rothbard's" vandalization of the entry on me as a claim of fact.) How does one deal with such things? I just changed the article to the last version that you had posted and kept the added link to an article that I had written about my last visit to Iraq. (I was opposed to the war, not in favor of it, and I wrote that "I am moderately optimistic about the possibilities for Iraqi freedom, provided that the new government is able to defeat the terrorists militarily" and that "I hope that the Iraqis find and kill the dedicated terrorists and dry up tacit support for the terrorist insurgency in the narrow pockets of Ba’athism and religious fanaticism.," which is rather different from what "Rothbard" had written: "He is a prominent advocate of the Iraq war, and is the author of a recent Cato Institute publication that calls for a "military victory" by the U.S. in Iraq.")

Any advice? Tom G. Palmer (tomgpalmer@tomgpalmer.com)

P.S. from Tom G. Palmer: I just did some more investigation and found that "Rothbard" had both supported the deletion of the entry on me on the grounds of that I was the author of the entry (not, I'm afraid, true)That "Rothbard" has repeated Mr. Raimondo's charges, has linked to the same utterly false charges in signed essays by Mr. Raimondo, and has edited the entry on Mr. Raimondo reminds me of the phrase that the late Murray Rothbard frequently used to describe such behavior: chutzpah. I also note in the discussion section that you had asked if I were in the room; I was not, but will have to follow this in future. Nor was my late mother, as some other person asked.

title: User talk:Will Beback/Old Archive5


text:
Environmental education

Environmental education (EE) refers to organized efforts to teach how natural environments function, and particularly, how human beings can manage behavior and ecosystems to live sustainably. It is a multi-disciplinary field integrating disciplines such as biology, chemistry, physics, ecology, earth science, atmospheric science, mathematics, and geography.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) states that EE is vital in imparting an inherent respect for nature among society and in enhancing public environmental awareness. UNESCO emphasises the role of EE in safeguarding future global developments of societal quality of life (QOL), through the protection of the environment, eradication of poverty, minimization of inequalities and insurance of sustainable development.

The term often implies education within the school system, from primary to post-secondary. However, it sometimes includes all efforts to educate the public and other audiences, including print materials, websites, media campaigns, etc. There are also ways that environmental education is taught outside the traditional classroom: aquariums, zoos, parks, and nature centers all have ways of teaching the public about the environment.

UNESCO and environmental awareness and education
UNESCO's involvement in environmental awareness and education goes back to the very beginnings of the Organization, with the creation in 1948 of the IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature, now the World Conservation Union), the first major non-governmental organization (NGO) mandated to help preserve the natural environment. UNESCO was also closely involved in convening the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972, which led to the setting up of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Subsequently, for two decades, UNESCO and UNEP led the International Environmental Education Programme (1975-1995), which set out a vision for, and gave practical guidance on how to mobilize education for environmental awareness.

In 1976, UNESCO launched an environmental education newsletter 'Connect' as the official organ of the UNESCO-UNEP International Environmental Education Programme (IEEP). It served as a clearinghouse to exchange information on Environmental Education (EE) in general and to promote the aims and activities of the IEEP in particular, as well as being a network for institutions and individuals interested and active in environment education until 2007.

The long-standing cooperation between UNESCO and UNEP on environmental education (and later ESD) also led to the co-organization of four major international conferences on environmental education since 1977: the First Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education in Tbilisi, Georgia (October 1977); the Conference "International Strategy for Action in the Field of Environmental Education and Training for the 1990s" in Moscow, Russian Federation (August 1987); the third International Conference "Environment and Society: Education and Public Awareness for Sustainability" at Thessaloniki, Greece (December 1997); and the Fourth International Conference on Environmental Education towards a Sustainable Future in Ahmedabad, India (November 2007). These meetings highlighted the pivotal role education plays in sustainable development.

It was at the Tbilisi conference in 1977 that the essential role of 'education in environmental matters' (as stated in the recommendations of the 1972 Stockholm Conference) was fully explored. Organized by UNESCO in cooperation with UNEP, this was the world's first intergovernmental conference on environmental education. In the subsequent Tbilisi Declaration, environment was interpreted in its 'totality—natural and built, technological and social (economic, political, cultural-historical, ethical, aesthetic)' (point 3). The goals formulated for environmental education went far beyond ecology in the curriculum and included development of a 'clear awareness of, and concern about, economic, social, political, and ecological interdependence in urban and rural areas' (point 2) which became one of the major bases of ESD.

Focus
Environmental education focuses on:

1. 	Engaging with citizens of all demographics to;

2.	Think critically, ethically, and creatively when evaluating environmental issues;

3.	Make educated judgments about those environmental issues;

4.	Develop skills and a commitment to act independently and collectively to sustain and enhance the environment; and,

5. 	To enhance their appreciation of the environment; resulting in positive environmental behavioural change.

Attributes
There are a few central qualities involved in environmental education that are useful contributions to the individual.

Environmental education:

 * 1) Enhances real-world problem solving.
 * 2) Strengthens physical activity and diet quality.
 * 3) Improves communication/leadership when working in groups.

Careers
There are various different career paths one could delve into within environmental education. Many of these careers require discovering and planning how to resolve environmental issues occurring in today's world. The specific responsibilities associated with each career will depend in part on their physical location, taking into account what environmental issue is most prevalent in the area. A general outlook of some careers in this field are:

 * Federal Government Park Ranger- Responsible for protecting the national parks, historical sites, and national seashores across the United States including the wildlife and ecosystems within them. There are many qualifications in order for one to become a park ranger and some include: obtaining a bachelor's degree and a passing grade in the PEB. Some focuses within this field include: enforcing park rules, giving tours to groups for educational purposes, and protecting parks from forest fires.
 * Outdoor Education Teacher- Teach students by using outdoor field and classroom work. Some invite guest speakers who are experts in their field to help teach how the basic principles of science are implemented in the real world. Some requirements for this career include becoming CPR certified and having a bachelor's degree in either environmental science or a field related to it. It can be a problematic field as there is no concurrence on the central concepts that are taught as well as teachers do not agree on what constitutes an important environmental issue.
 * Environmental Scientist- Use of field work to research contamination in nature when writing plans in creating projects for environmental research. Environmental Scientists research topics such as air pollution, water quality, and wildlife. They also study how human health is affected by changes in the environment. Some requirements for this career are a bachelor's degree with a double major in environmental science and either biology, physics or chemistry.
 * Environmental Engineer- Involves the combination of biology/chemistry with engineering to generate ways to ensure the health of the planet. Scientific research is analyzed and projects are designed as a result of that research in order to come up with solutions to issues of the environment like air pollution. A bachelor's degree in civil engineering or general engineering is required as well as some experience in this field.

Related fields
Environmental education has crossover with multiple other disciplines. These fields of education complement environmental education yet have unique philosophies.

 * Citizen Science (CS) aims to address both scientific and environmental outcomes through enlisting the public in the collection of data, through relatively simple protocols, generally from local habitats over long periods of time.
 * Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) aims to reorient education to empower individuals to make informed decisions for environmental integrity, social justice, and economic viability for both present and future generations, whilst respecting cultural diversities.
 * Climate Change Education (CCE) aims in enhancing the public's understanding of climate change, its consequences, and its problems, and to prepare current and future generations to limit the magnitude of climate change and to respond to its challenges. Specifically, CCE needs to help learners develop knowledge, skills and values and action to engage and learn about the causes, impact and management of climate change.
 * Science Education (SE) focuses primarily on teaching knowledge and skills, to develop innovative thought in society.
 * Outdoor Education (OE) relies on the assumption that learning experiences outdoors in 'nature' foster an appreciation of nature, resulting in pro-environmental awareness and action. Outdoor education means learning "in" and "for" the outdoors.
 * Experiential education (ExE) is a process through which a learner constructs knowledge, skill, and value from direct experiences" Experiential education can be viewed as both a process and method to deliver the ideas and skills associated with environmental education.
 * Garden-based learning (GBL) is an instructional strategy that utilizes the garden as a teaching tool. It encompasses programs, activities and projects in which the garden is the foundation for integrated learning, in and across disciplines, through active, engaging, real-world experiences that have personal meaning for children, youth, adults and communities in an informal outside learning setting.
 * Inquiry-based Science (IBS) is an active open style of teaching in which students follow scientific steps in a similar manner as scientists to study some problem. Often used in biological and environmental settings.

While each of these educational fields has their own objectives, there are points where they overlap with the intentions and philosophy of environmental education.

History
The roots of environmental education can be traced back as early as the 18th century when Jean-Jacques Rousseau stressed the importance of an education that focuses on the environment in Emile: or, On Education. Several decades later, Louis Agassiz, a Swiss-born naturalist, echoed Rousseau's philosophy as he encouraged students to "Study nature, not books." These two influential scholars helped lay the foundation for a concrete environmental education program, known as nature study, which took place in the late 19th and early 20th century.

The nature study movement used fables and moral lessons to help students develop an appreciation of nature and embrace the natural world. Anna Botsford Comstock, the head of the Department of Nature Study at Cornell University, was a prominent figure in the nature study movement. She wrote the Handbook for Nature Study in 1911 which used nature to educate children on cultural values. Comstock and the other leaders of the movement, such as Liberty Hyde Bailey, helped Nature Study garner tremendous amounts of support from community leaders, teachers, and scientists to change the science curriculum for children across the United States.

A new type of environmental education, Conservation Education, emerged in the US as a result of the Great Depression and Dust Bowl during the 1920s and 1930s. Conservation Education dealt with the natural world in a drastically different way from Nature Study because it focused on rigorous scientific training rather than natural history. Conservation Education was a major scientific management and planning tool that helped solve social, economic, and environmental problems during this time period.

The modern environmental education movement, which gained significant momentum in the late 1960s and early 1970s, stems from Nature Study and Conservation Education. During this time period, many events—such as the Cold War, the Civil rights movement and the Vietnam War—placed many Americans at odds with one another and the U.S. government. However, as more people began to fear the fallout from radiation, the chemical pesticides mentioned in Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, and the significant amounts of air pollution and waste, the public's concern for their health and the health of their natural environment led to a unifying phenomenon known as environmentalism. Environmental education was born of the realization that solving complex local and global problems cannot be accomplished by politicians and experts alone, but requires "the support and active participation of an informed public in their various roles as consumers, voters, employers, and business and community leaders." In 1960 the National Rural Studies Association (now known as the National Association for Environmental Education) was established in the UK to promote environmental education and support teachers in incorporating sustainability into their curricula.

One of the first articles about environmental education as a new movement appeared in the Phi Delta Kappan in 1969, authored by James A. Swan. A definition of "Environmental Education" first appeared in The Journal of Environmental Education in 1969, written by William B. Stapp. Stapp later went on to become the first Director of Environmental Education for UNESCO, and then the Global Rivers International Network.

Ultimately, the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970 – a national teach-in about environmental problems – paved the way for the modern environmental education movement. Later that same year, President Nixon passed the National Environmental Education Act, which was intended to incorporate environmental education into K-12 schools. Then, in 1971, the National Association for Environmental Education (now known as the North American Association for Environmental Education) was created to improve environmental literacy by providing resources to teachers and promoting environmental education programs.

Internationally, environmental education gained recognition when the UN Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1972, declared environmental education must be used as a tool to address global environmental problems. The United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) created three major declarations that have guided the course of environmental education.

In 2002, the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development 2005-2014 (UNDESD) was formed as a way to reconsider, excite, and change approaches to acting positively on global challenges. The Commission on Education and Communication (CEC) helped support the work of the UNDESD by composing a backbone structure for education for sustainability, which contained five major components. The components are "Imagining a better future", "Critical thinking and reflection", "Participation in decision making" and "Partnerships, and Systemic thinking".

On June 9–14, 2013, the seventh World Environmental Education Congress was held in Marrakesh, Morocco. The overall theme of the conference was "Environmental education and issues in cities and rural areas: seeking greater harmony", and incorporated 11 different areas of concern. The World Environmental Education Congress had 2,400 members, representing over 150 countries. This meeting was the first time ever that it had been held in an Arab country, and was put together by two different organizations, the Mohamed VI Foundation for Environmental Protection and the World Environmental Education Congress Permanent Secretariat in Italy. Topics addressed at the congress include stressing the importance of environmental education and its role to empower, establishing partnerships to promote environmental education, how to mainstream environmental and sustainability, and even how to make universities "greener".

Stockholm Declaration
June 5–16, 1972 - The Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. The document was made up of 7 proclamations and 26 principles "to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the preservation and enhancement of the human environment."

Belgrade Charter
October 13–22, 1975 - The Belgrade Charter was the outcome of the International Workshop on Environmental Education held in Belgrade, then in Yugoslavia, now in Serbia. The Belgrade Charter was built upon the Stockholm Declaration and added goals, objectives, and guiding principles of environmental education programs. It defined an audience for environmental education, which included the general public.

Tbilisi Declaration
October 14–26, 1977 - The Tbilisi Declaration "noted the unanimous accord in the important role of environmental education in the preservation and improvement of the world's environment, as well as in the sound and balanced development of the world's communities." The Tbilisi Declaration updated and clarified The Stockholm Declaration and The Belgrade Charter by including new goals, objectives, characteristics, and guiding principles of environmental education.

Later that decade, in 1977, the Intergovernmental Conference on Environmental Education in Tbilisi, Georgian SSR, Soviet Union emphasized the role of Environmental Education in preserving and improving the global environment and sought to provide the framework and guidelines for environmental education. The Conference laid out the role, objectives, and characteristics of environmental education, and provided several goals and principles for environmental education.

Pope Francis in his 2015 encyclical letter Laudato si', referred to a broadening of the goals of environmental education:"Whereas in the beginning it was mainly centred on scientific information, consciousness-raising and the prevention of environmental risks, it tends now to include a critique of the “myths” of a modernity grounded in a utilitarian mindset (individualism, unlimited progress, competition, consumerism, the unregulated market). It seeks also to restore the various levels of ecological equilibrium, establishing harmony within ourselves, with others, with nature and other living creatures, and with God."

Environmental education in the teaching curriculum
Environmental education has been considered an additional or elective subject in much of traditional K-12 curriculum. At the elementary school level, environmental education can take the form of science enrichment curriculum, natural history field trips, community service projects, and participation in outdoor science schools. EE policies assist schools and organizations in developing and improving environmental education programs that provide citizens with an in-depth understanding of the environment. School related EE policies focus on three main components: curricula, green facilities, and training.

Schools can integrate environmental education into their curricula with sufficient funding from EE policies. This approach – known as using the "environment as an integrating context" for learning – uses the local environment as a framework for teaching state and district education standards. In addition to funding environmental curricula in the classroom, environmental education policies allot the financial resources for hands-on, outdoor learning. These activities and lessons help address and mitigate "nature deficit disorder", as well as encourage healthier lifestyles.

Green schools, or green facility promotion, are another main component of environmental education policies. Greening school facilities cost, on average, a little less than 2 percent more than creating a traditional school, but payback from these energy efficient buildings occur within only a few years. Environmental education policies help reduce the relatively small burden of the initial start-up costs for green schools. Green school policies also provide grants for modernization, renovation, or repair of older school facilities. Additionally, healthy food options are also a central aspect of green schools. These policies specifically focus on bringing freshly prepared food, made from high-quality, locally grown ingredients into schools.

In secondary school, environmental curriculum can be a focused subject within the sciences or is a part of student interest groups or clubs. At the undergraduate and graduate level, it can be considered its own field within education, environmental studies, environmental science and policy, ecology, or human/cultural ecology programs.

Environmental education is not restricted to in-class lesson plans. Children can learn about the environment in many ways. Experiential lessons in the school yard, field trips to national parks, after-school green clubs, and school-wide sustainability projects help make the environment an easily accessible topic. Furthermore, celebration of Earth Day or participation in EE week (run through the National Environmental Education Foundation) can help further environmental education. Effective programs promote a holistic approach and lead by example, using sustainable practices in the school to encourage students and parents to bring environmental education into their home.

The final aspect of environmental education policies involves training individuals to thrive in a sustainable society. In addition to building a strong relationship with nature, citizens must have the skills and knowledge to succeed in a 21st-century workforce. Thus, environmental education policies fund both teacher training and worker training initiatives. Teachers train to effectively teach and incorporate environmental studies. On the other hand, the current workforce must be trained or re-trained so they can adapt to the new green economy. Environmental education policies that fund training programs are critical to educating citizens to prosper in a sustainable society.

In the United States
Following the 1970s, non-governmental organizations that focused on environmental education continued to form and grow, the number of teachers implementing environmental education in their classrooms increased, and the movement gained stronger political backing. A critical move forward came when the United States Congress passed the National Environmental Education Act of 1990, which placed the Office of Environmental Education in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and allowed the agency to create environmental education initiatives at the federal level.

EPA defines environmental education as "a process that allows individuals to explore environmental issues, engage in problem solving, and take action to improve the environment. As a result, individuals develop a deeper understanding of environmental issues and have the skills to make informed and responsible decisions." EPA has listed the components of what should be gained from EE:
 * Awareness and sensitivity to the environment and environmental challenges
 * Knowledge and understanding of the environment and environmental challenges
 * Attitudes of concern for the environment and motivation to improve or maintain environmental quality
 * Skills to identify and help resolve environmental challenges
 * Participation in activities that lead to the resolution of environmental challenges.

Through the EPA Environmental Education (EE) Grant Program, public schools, communities agencies, and NGO's are eligible to receive federal funding for local educational projects that reflect the EPA's priorities: air quality, water quality, chemical safety, and public participation among the communities.

In the United States some of the antecedents of environmental education were the Nature Study movement, conservation education and school camping. Nature studies integrated academic approach with outdoor exploration. Conservation education raised awareness about the misuse of natural resources and the need for their preservation. George Perkins Marsh discoursed on humanity's integral part of the natural world. Governmental agencies such as the U.S. Forest Service and the EPA supported conservation efforts. Conservation ideals still guide environmental education today. School camping was exposure to the environment and use of resources outside of the classroom for educational purposes. The legacies of these antecedents are still present in the evolving arena of environmental education.

Obstacles
A study of Ontario teachers explored obstacles to environmental education. Through an internet-based survey questionnaire, 300 K-12 teachers from Ontario, Canada responded. Based on the results of the survey, the most significant challenges identified by the sample of Ontario teachers include over-crowded curriculum, lack of resources, low priority of environmental education in schools, limited access to the outdoors, student apathy to environmental issues, and the controversial nature of sociopolitical action.

An influential article by Stevenson outlines conflicting goals of environmental education and traditional schooling. According to Stevenson, the recent critical and action orientation of environmental education creates a challenging task for schools. Contemporary environmental education strives to transform values that underlie decision making from ones that aid environmental (and human) degradation to those that support a sustainable planet. This contrasts with the traditional purpose of schools of conserving the existing social order by reproducing the norms and values that currently dominate environmental decision making. Confronting this contradiction is a major challenge to environmental education teachers.

Additionally, the dominant narrative that all environmental educators have an agenda can present difficulties in expanding reach. It is said that an environmental educator is one "who uses information and educational processes to help people analyze the merits of the many and varied points of view usually present on a given environmental issues." Greater efforts must be taken to train educators on the importance of staying within the profession's substantive structure, and in informing the general public on the profession's intention to empower fully informed decision making.

Another obstacle facing the implementation of environmental education lies the quality of education itself. Charles Sayan, the executive director of the Ocean Conservation Society, represents alternate views and critiques on environmental education in his new book The Failure of Environmental Education (And How We Can Fix It). In a Yale Environment 360 interview, Sayan discusses his book and outlines several flaws within environmental education, particularly its failed efforts to "reach its potential in fighting climate change, biodiversity loss, and environmental degradation". He believes that environmental education is not "keeping pace with environmental degradation" and encourages structural reform by increasing student engagement as well as improving relevance of information. These same critiques are discussed in Stewart Hudson's BioScience paper, "Challenges for Environmental Education: Issues and Ideas for the 21st Century". Another study describes obstacles in environmental education also rooted in the capability of the school leaders. They are the epicentre of education. However, implementing ESD in schools is difficult as school leaders faced too many challenges for a single plan to work.

In 2017, a study found that high school science textbooks and government resources on climate change from United States, EU, Canada and Australia did focus their recommendations for emission reductions on lower-impact actions instead of promoting the most effective emission-reduction strategies.

Movement
A movement that has progressed since the relatively recent founding of environmental education in industrial societies has transported the participant from nature appreciation and awareness to education for an ecologically sustainable future. This trend may be viewed as a microcosm of how many environmental education programs seek to first engage participants through developing a sense of nature appreciation which then translates into actions that affect conservation and sustainability.

Programs range from New York to California, including Life Lab at University of California, Santa Cruz, as well as Cornell University in

Environmental Education in the Global South
Environmentalism has also begun to make waves in the development of the global South, as the "First World" takes on the responsibility of helping developing countries to combat environmental issues produced and prolonged by conditions of poverty. Unique to environmental education in the Global South is its particular focus on sustainable development. This goal has been a part of international agenda since the 1900s, with the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organizations (UNESCO) and the Earth Council Alliance (ECA) at the forefront of pursuing sustainable development in the south.

The 1977 Tbilisi intergovernmental conference played a key role in the development of outcome of the conference was the Tbilisi Declaration, a unanimous accord which "constitutes the framework, principles, and guidelines for environmental education at all levels—local, national, regional, and international—and for all age groups both inside and outside the formal school system" recommended as a criterion for implementing environmental education. The Declaration was established with the intention of increasing environmental stewardship, awareness and behavior, which paved the way for the rise of modern environmental education.

After the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, over 80 National Councils for Sustainable Development in developing countries were created between 1992–1998 to aid in compliance of international sustainability goals and encourage "creative solutions".

In 1993, the Earth Council Alliance released the Treaty on environmental education for sustainable societies and global responsibility, sparking discourse on environmental education. The Treaty, in 65 statements, outlines the role of environmental education in facilitating sustainable development through all aspects of democratized participation and provides a methodology for the Treaty's signatories. It has been instrumentally utilized in expanding the field towards the global South, wherein the discourse of "environmental education for sustainable development" recognizes a need to include human population dynamics in EE and emphasizes "aspects related to contemporary economic realities and by placing greater emphasis on concerns for planetary solidarity". Even as a necessary tool for the proliferation of environmental stewardship, environmental education implemented in the South varies and addresses environmental issues in relation to their impact different communities and specific community needs. Whereas in the developed global North where the environmentalist sentiments are centered around conservation without taking into consideration "the needs of people living within communities", the global South must push forth a conservation agenda that parallels with social, economic, and political development. The role of environmental education in the South is centered around potential economic growth in development projects, as explicitly stated by the UNESCO, to apply environmental education for sustainable development through a "creative and effective use of human potential and all forms of capital to ensure rapid and more equitable economic growth, with minimal impact on the environment".

Moving into the 21st century, EE was furthered by United Nations as a part of the 2000 Millennium Development Goals to improve the planet by 2015. The MDGs included global efforts to end extreme poverty, work towards gender equality, access to education, and sustainable development to name a few. Although the MDGs produced great outcomes, its objectives were not met, and MDGs were soon replaced by Sustainable Development Goals. A "universal call to action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that all people enjoy peace and prosperity", SDGs became the new face of global priorities. These new goals incorporated objectives from MDGs yet incorporated a necessary environmental framework to "address key systemic barriers to sustainable development such as inequality, unsustainable consumption patterns, weak institutional capacity and environmental degradation that the MDGs neglected".

Trends
One of the current trends within environmental education seeks to move from an approach of ideology and activism to one that allows students to make informed decisions and take action based on experience as well as data. Within this process, environmental curricula have progressively been integrated into governmental education standards. A study found that standardized curriculum can be a significant impediment to environmental education implementation. Some environmental educators find this movement distressing and move away from the original political and activist approach to environmental education while others find this approach more valid and accessible. Regardless, many educational institutions are encouraging students to take an active role in environmental education and stewardship at their institutions. They know that "to be successful, greening initiatives require both grassroots support from the student body and top down support from high-level campus administrators."

Italy announced in 2019 that environmental education (including topics of sustainability and climate change) will be integrated into other subject matter and will be a mandatory part of the curriculum in public schools.

In the United States, Title IV, Part A of the Every Student Succeeds Act states that environmental education is eligible for grant funding. The program gives a "well-rounded" education as well as access to student health and safety programs. Title IV, Part B states that environmental literacy programs are also eligible for funding through the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. The funds that are available for both parts are block granted to the states using the Title I formula. In the FY2018 budget, Titles IVA and IVB were both given $1.1 billion and $1.2 billion. For title IVA, this is a $700 million raise from the 2017 budget which makes the 2018–2019 school year the most availability to environmental education ever.

Renewable Energy Education
Renewable energy education (REE) is a relatively new field of education. The overall objectives of REE pertain to giving a working knowledge and understanding of concepts, facts, principles and technologies for gathering the renewable sources of energy. Based on these objectives, the role of a renewable energy education programs should be informative, investigative, educative, and imaginative. REE should be taught with the world's population in mind as the world will run out of non-renewable resources within the next century. Renewable energy education is also being brought to political leaders as a means of getting more sustainable development to occur around the globe. This is happening in the hopes that it will uproot millions of people out of poverty and into a better quality of life in many countries. Renewable energy education is also about bringing awareness of climate change to the general public as well as an understanding of the current renewable energy technologies. An understanding of the new technologies is imperative to get them stream-lined and accepted by the vast majority of the public.

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

title: Environmental education


text:
Beragh

Beragh (from Irish: Bearach, meaning "place of points/hills/standing stones" ) is a village and townland in County Tyrone, Northern Ireland. It is about 8 mi southeast of Omagh and is in the Fermanagh and Omagh District Council area. The 2001 Census recorded a population of 520.

History
One of the first known references to the village was on a 1690 Plantation map of Ireland. In the 1820s this village, the property of Earl Belmore, was described as having "one long wide street of very mean houses whose tenants for the most part appear to be poor". The inhabitants mostly worked in trade and agriculture. In 1841 the population was 617, the village having 103 houses. The village had a market patent granted under the name "Lowrystown".

The Portadown, Dungannon and Omagh Junction Railway opened Beragh railway station on 2 September 1861. The Ulster Transport Authority closed the station and the PD&O line on 15 February 1965.

19th century population
The population of the village decreased during the 19th century:

21st century population
Beragh is classified as a small village or hamlet by the NI Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) (i.e. with a population between 500 and 1,000 people). On Census day (29 April 2001) there were 520 people living in Beragh. Of these: For more details see: NI Neighbourhood Information Service
 * 28.5% were aged under 16 years;
 * 18.1% were aged 60 and over;
 * the average age was 34.3 years (NI average age 35.8 years);
 * 47.5% of the population were male and 52.5% were female;
 * 62.8% were from a Catholic Community Background;
 * 35.4% were from a Protestant and Other Christian (including Christian related)' Community Background;
 * 6.3% were born outside Northern Ireland; and
 * 0.0% were from an ethnic group other than white.

Sport

 * Beragh Red Knights is the local Gaelic football club.
 * Beragh Swifts F.C. is the local football club which plays in the Fermanagh & Western 1st Division; reserve team plays in the F&W 2nd Division.

Beragh Townland
The townland is situated in the historic barony of Omagh East and the civil parish of Clogherny and covers an area of 481 acres.

The population of the townland declined during the 19th century:

The village of Beragh is in the townland of the same name and in 1891 had an area of 17 acres.

title: Beragh