text:
History of Newcastle United F.C.

The history of Newcastle United Football Club, an English professional association football club based in Newcastle upon Tyne, North East England, covers the club's entire history from its formation to the present day. Formed by a merger between Newcastle East End and Newcastle West End to become 'United' in 1892, the club was elected to the Football League, which they entered in 1893.

Newcastle are England's 9th most successful club of all time. They have been English champions four times (in 1905, 1907, 1909, 1927) and FA Cup winners six times (in 1910, 1924, 1932, 1951, 1952, 1955). The club have also won the 1909 Charity Shield, the 1968–69 Inter-Cities Fairs Cup, and the 2006 Intertoto Cup. Newcastle have reached the League Cup final twice, finishing runners-up in both years ( 1976 and 2023). They have played in England's top league from 1898–1934, 1948–61, 1965–78, 1984–89, 1993–2009, 2010–2016, and 2017–present, playing in the second tier at all other times.

The creation (1881–1895)
The first record of football being played on Tyneside dates from 3 March 1877 at Elswick Rugby Club. Later that year, Newcastle's first association football club, Tyne Association, was formed. The origins of Newcastle United Football Club itself can be traced back to the formation of a football club by the Stanley Cricket Club of Byker in November 1881. They won their first match 5–0 against Elswick Leather Works 2nd XI. The team was renamed Newcastle East End F.C. in October 1882, to avoid confusion with the cricket club in Stanley, County Durham.

Shortly after this, another Byker side, Rosewood FC, merged with East End to form an even stronger side. Meanwhile, across the city, West End Cricket Club began to take an interest in football and in August 1882, they formed Newcastle West End F.C. West End played their early football on their cricket pitch, but in May 1886, the club moved into St James' Park. The two clubs became rivals in the Northern League. In 1889, Newcastle East End became a professional team, before becoming a limited company the following March.

West End soon became the city's premier club. East End were anxious not to be left behind and lured Tom Watson into becoming the club secretary/manager in the close season of 1888 and from that point, never looked back; Watson made several good signings, especially from Scotland, and the Heaton club went from strength to strength, while West End's fortunes slipped dramatically.

The region's first league competition was formed in 1889 and the FA Cup began to cause interest. Ambitious East End turned professional in 1889, a huge step for a local club, and in March 1890, they made an even more adventurous move by becoming a limited company with capital of 1,000 pounds in ten shilling notes. During the spring of 1892, in a season during which their results were at an all-time low, and in which they had lost to their bitter rivals, East End, five times, West End found themselves in serious trouble. They approached East End with a view to a take over, the directors having decided that the club could no longer continue.

What actually happened was that West End wound up, while some of its players and most of its backroom staff joined East End. East End also took over the lease on St. James' Park in May 1892.

With only one senior club in the city for fans to support, development of the club was much more rapid. Despite being refused entry to the Football League's First Division at the start of the 1892–93 season, they were invited to play in their new Second Division. However, with no big names playing in the Second Division, they turned down the offer and remained in the Northern League, stating "gates would not meet the heavy expenses incurred for travelling". In a bid to start drawing larger crowds, Newcastle East End decided to adopt a new name in recognition of the merger. Suggested names included Newcastle F.C., Newcastle Rangers, Newcastle City and City of Newcastle, but Newcastle United was decided upon on 9 December 1892, to signify the unification of the two teams. The name change was accepted by the Football Association on 22 December, but the club was not legally constituted as Newcastle United Football Club Co. Ltd. until 6 September 1895. At the start of the 1893–94 season, Newcastle United were once again refused entry to the First Division and so joined the Second Division, along with Liverpool and Woolwich Arsenal. They played their first competitive match in the division that September against Woolwich Arsenal, with a score of 2–2.

The first glory era (1895–1914)
Turnstile numbers were still low, and the incensed club published a statement claiming "The Newcastle public do not deserve to be catered for as far as professional football is concerned". However, eventually figures picked up by 1895–96, when 14,000 fans watched the team play Bury. That season Frank Watt became secretary of the club, and he was instrumental in promotion to the First Division for the 1898–99 season. However, they lost their first game 4–2 at home to Wolves and finished their first season in thirteenth place.

In 1903–04, the club built up a promising squad of players, and went on to dominate English football for almost a decade, the team known for their "artistic play, combining team-work and quick, short passing". Newcastle started to purchase talented players, especially from Scotland, and soon had a squad to rival all of England. With players like Colin Veitch, Jackie Rutherford, Jimmy Lawrence and Albert Shepherd, Newcastle had a team of international talent. Bill McCracken, Jimmy Howie, Peter McWilliam and Andy Aitken were also household names in their day. Long after his retirement, defender Peter McWilliam said "The Newcastle team of the 1900s would give any modern side a two goal start and beat them, and further more, beat them at a trot".

Newcastle United went on to win the League on three occasions during the 1900s: in 1904–05, 1906–07 and 1908–09. Newcastle reached five FA Cup finals in the years leading up to World War I. In 1904–05, they nearly did the double, losing to Aston Villa in the 1905 FA Cup Final. They were beaten again the following year by Everton in the 1906 FA Cup Final. They reached the final again in 1908 where they lost to Wolves. In 1908 the team suffered a record 9–1 home defeat to local rivals Sunderland in the league but still won that season's league title. They finally won the FA Cup in 1910 when they beat Barnsley in the final. They lost again the following year in the final against Bradford City.

Interwar success (1919–1939)
The team returned to the FA Cup final in 1924, in the second final held at the then new Wembley Stadium. They defeated Aston Villa, winning the club's second FA Cup. Three years later they won the First Division championship a fourth time in 1926–27. Record signing & Scottish international centre-forward Hughie Gallacher, one of the most prolific goal scorers in the club's history, captained the championship-winning team. Other key players in this period were Neil Harris, Stan Seymour and Frank Hudspeth. Seymour was to become an influential figure for the next 40 years as player, manager and director.

In 1930, Newcastle United came close to relegation, and at the end of the season Gallacher left the club for Chelsea, and at the same time Andy Cunningham became the club's first team manager. In 1931–32, the club won the FA Cup a third time in the infamous 'Over the Line' final. United won the game 2–1 after scoring a goal following a cross from Jimmy Richardson which appeared to be hit from out of play - over the line. There were no action replays then and the referee allowed the goal, a controversial talking point in FA Cup history.

Newcastle boasted master players like Sam Weaver and Jack Allen, as well as the first player-manager in the top division in Scottish international Andy Cunningham. But at the end of the 1933–34 season, the team were relegated to the Second Division after 32 seasons in the First. Cunningham left as manager and Tom Mather took over. Amazingly in the same season as they fell into the Second Division, United defeated Liverpool 9–2 and Everton 7–3 within the space of a week.

The club found it difficult to adjust to the Second Division and were nearly further relegated in the 1937–38 season, when they were spared on goal averages.

The Wartime League (1939–1946)
When World War II broke in 1939, Newcastle had a chance to regroup, and in the War period, they brought in Jackie Milburn, Tommy Walker and Bobby Cowell.

Newcastle United won no Wartime League trophies, but Jackie Milburn made his debut in 1943 in a "Stripes vs Blues" match. Milburn's side was losing at half-time 3–0, but following a switch from midfielder to centre forward, he scored 6 goals to help them win the match 9–3. Jackie went on to score 38 goals in the next 3 years of the league's life.

Postwar cup-winners (1946–1978)

By the time peace was restored in 1945, Seymour was at the forefront of Newcastle's affairs, manager in all but name. He ensured that the Magpies possessed an entertaining eleven full of stars, a mix of home-grown talent like Jackie Milburn, Bobby Cowell and Ernie Taylor, as well as big signings in the shape of George Robledo, Bobby Mitchell, Joe Harvey, Len Shackleton and Frank Brennan.

Newcastle spent the first couple of years post-war in the Second Division. Crowds were extremely high after the return to football, and in 1946 Newcastle recorded the joint-highest victory in English League Football history, defeating Newport County 13–0. Len Shackleton, playing his debut in that match, scored 6 goals in the match, another record for Newcastle United.

Newcastle returned to the First Division in double of the time. Promotion was achieved in 1948 in front of vast crowds. An average of almost 57,000 at every home game saw United's fixtures that year, a national record for years to come. That was just the start of another period of success.

During the Fifties decade United lifted the FA Cup trophy on three occasions within a five-year period. In 1951 they defeated Blackpool 2–0, a year later Arsenal were beaten 1–0 and in 1955 United crushed Manchester City 3–1. The Magpies were known in every corner of the country, and so were their players; 'Wor Jackie' Milburn and Bobby 'Dazzler' Mitchell the pick of a side that was renowned the nation over. Other players of this time were Frank Brennan (like Mitchell a Scot), Ivor Broadis, Len White and Welshman Ivor Allchurch.

Despite having quality players throughout the era, stars like Allchurch, White and George Eastham during the latter years of the decade, United slipped from the First Division in 1961 under the controversial management of ex-Manchester United star, Charlie Mitten. It was a huge blow to the club.

An old war-horse returned to revitalise the Magpies in the shape of Joe Harvey, who had skippered the club to much of their post-war success. He teamed up with Stan Seymour to rebuild United and the Black'n'Whites returned to the elite as Second Division Champions in 1965. United then became very much an unpredictable side, always capable of defeating the best, but never quite realising their huge potential until very recently.

Joe Harvey's side qualified for Europe for the first time in 1968 and stunned everyone the following year by lifting the Inter Cities Fairs Cup; the forerunner of the UEFA Cup. United possessed a solid eleven and Newcastle's tradition of fielding a famous Number 9 at centre-forward since earliest years continued as big Welshman Wyn Davies was prominent along with the likes of Pop Robson, Bobby Moncur and Frank Clark.

In the years that followed European success, manager Harvey brought in a string of talented entertainers who thrilled the Gallowgate crowd. Pleasers like Jimmy Smith, Tony Green and Terry Hibbitt. And especially a new centre-forward by the name of Malcolm Macdonald.

Nicknamed 'Supermac', Macdonald was one of United's greatest hero figures. Brash, arrogant and devastating in front of goal, he led United's attack to Wembley in 1974, against Liverpool in the FA Cup. But the Magpies failed to bring the trophy back to Tyneside, and a complete lack of success in any of the competitions the next season resulted in Joe Harvey being sacked in mid-1975.

Blackburn manager Gordon Lee was appointed to replace Harvey, and despite a mediocre league campaign in 1975–76, led the club to its first League Cup final, which ended in defeat by Manchester City. Despite Macdonald controversially being sold to Arsenal for a cut price deal, the following season saw United's best League campaign for years, and by Christmas the club looked to have an outside chance of winning the title. However, Lee walked out on the club to take over at Everton at the start of 1977, and inexperienced coach Richard Dinnis was put in charge of the team after the players demanded that he be given the job. United's form initially remained quite consistent under Dinnis, and they secured 5th place and a UEFA Cup spot at the end of the season. However, the team totally fell apart the following season, and Dinnis was sacked after a run of ten straight League defeats and a thumping UEFA Cup exit at the hands of French team SC Bastia. Bill McGarry took over as manager, but was powerless to prevent United from being relegated in statistically their worst season ever. The only mercy they had was Leicester City's terrible goal difference preventing United from finishing bottom of the table.

Bouncing between divisions (1978–1992)
McGarry remained in charge of the club, but only managed two midtable finishes before being sacked in the wake of an uninspiring start to the 1980–81 season, and it was his successor Arthur Cox who steered United back again to the First Division with ex England captain Kevin Keegan leading the attack, having joined the Magpies in a sensational deal in 1982.

The football inspired by Keegan captivated Tyneside and United stormed into the top division in a style only bettered by Kevin's own brand of football when he returned to the club as manager a decade later. Cox had also signed young winger Chris Waddle out of non-league football, as well as young striker Peter Beardsley, Liverpool midfielder Terry McDermott and former Manchester United midfielder David McCreery. The club was rocked however when Cox resigned after the board refused to offer him an improved contract in the aftermath of promotion, and, surprisingly, accepted an offer to take charge of Derby County - who had been relegated from the Second Division.

One of English footballs greatest talents, Paul Gascoigne or 'Gazza', emerged as an exciting 18-year-old midfielder in 1985-86, under Newcastle's next manager Jack Charlton, who left after only one season despite Newcastle achieving a secure mid-table finish on their return to the First Division. His successor was former player Willie McFaul. Newcastle consolidated their place in Division One but then a period of selling their best players (Beardsley to Liverpool, and Waddle and eventually Gascoigne both to Tottenham), rocked the club and led to supporter unrest, as did a share-war for control of the boardroom. The effect of this on the pitch soon proved evident, as McFaul was sacked after a dismal start to the 1988–89 season, and new boss Jim Smith was unable to turn Newcastle around, resulting in them finishing at the foot of the First Division in 1989 and dropping back into the Second Division.

Smith then signed Portsmouth striker Mick Quinn and Newcastle began the 1989–90 season on a high note, beating promotion favourites Leeds United 5–2 on the opening day with Quinn scoring four goals, and Newcastle appeared to be on the path to a revival. However, they missed out on automatic promotion by one place, before enduring a humiliating play-off exit at the hands of local rivals Sunderland. The intensifying boardroom battle soon took its toll on the club, and Smith resigned early in the following season with the side stuck in mid-table. Ossie Ardiles became the club's new manager, and despite being initially being the club's most popular manager since Joe Harvey, Newcastle dropped to the bottom of the Second Division in October 1991. Results failed to improve, despite the acquisition of a new striker in David Kelly and the efforts of promising young players including Steve Howey, Steve Watson and Gavin Peacock, and in February 1992 Ardiles was sacked. Despite being the best-supported side in the division and frequently still managing to pull in crowds of more than 20,000, Newcastle were also millions of pounds in debt and faced with the real prospect of third-tier football for the first time ever. A saviour was needed, and in came new chairman John Hall, who offered the manager's job to Kevin Keegan. Despite having vowed never to enter management following his retirement as a player, Keegan accepted the offer to manage Newcastle. His first task was to deliver Second Division survival.

Into the Premier League (1992–2007)
Kevin Keegan returned as manager in the 1991–92 season, and survived relegation from the Second Division. The club's finances were transformed, with Hall aiming to put Newcastle among Europe's biggest clubs, and signings like Rob Lee and Andy Cole helped Newcastle to promotion the following season, 1992–93, as champions of the new First Division. The finish also secured qualification for the 1993–94 UEFA Cup upon return to the top flight in the 1993–94 Premier League season.

St James' Park was redeveloped during this time into an all-seated stadium with a capacity of 36,000. This increased to 52,000 in the late 1990s, after the rejection of Hall's proposal to build a larger stadium at Castle Leazes.

Keegan stunned fans and critics alike in 1995 when prolific striker Andy Cole was sold to Manchester United in exchange for £6 million and midfielder Keith Gillespie, leaving many to blame the sale to have affected Newcastle's title chances for the 1994–95 season, in which they finished sixth. The club, however, continued to build up a reputation for playing attacking football under Keegan. In the 1995–96 season, high-profile foreign stars David Ginola and Faustino Asprilla, in addition to British players Peter Beardsley and striker Les Ferdinand, guided the team to a second-place finish. During the 1996–97 season, Keegan made one signing, securing the services of England striker Alan Shearer for a then-world record transfer fee of £15 million to produce a shrewd partnership with Les Ferdinand, and claim a 5–0 victory over title rivals Manchester United. whilst remaining in contention to win the league.

With the team having failed to win any trophies under his reign, Keegan resigned as manager on 8 January 1997, saying, "I feel that I have taken the club as far as I can."

Kenny Dalglish replaced Keegan as manager, and maintained the club's good form through to the end of the season, finishing second. In the 1997–98 season, Les Ferdinand and David Ginola both left the club, whilst Alan Shearer broke his ankle in a pre-season friendly, keeping him out for the first half of the season. Dalglish signed Ian Rush, John Barnes, Duncan Ferguson and Stuart Pearce to bolster the squad, and achieved a 3–2 victory over Barcelona in the UEFA Champions League through a Faustino Asprilla hat-trick, but Dalglish's cautious brand of football, as opposed to the attacking style played under Keegan, did not prove successful—the club failed to progress beyond the Champions League group stage, finished 13th in the Premier League, and lost the FA Cup final to Arsenal. Dalglish began the 1998–99 season signing Nolberto Solano and Dietmar Hamann, but was soon dismissed following the club's declining form.

Ruud Gullit replaced him, however the club again finished the league in 13th place and again lost in the FA Cup final, this time to Manchester United F.C. Gullit resigned early in the 1999–2000 season, having fallen out with several senior players, including Alan Shearer and captain Rob Lee. Keith Gillespie later blamed Gullit's arrogance for his failure as manager of the club.

Ex-England manager Bobby Robson was brought in to replace Gullit in September 1999. He ensured Newcastle's survival in the Premiership, but the club remained in the bottom half of the table, finishing 11th in 1999–2000 and 2000–01. Robson, however, built up an exciting young squad, and an unlikely top four challenge emerged in 2001–02 season—Newcastle finished in fourth place.

Playing in the Champions League in 2002–03, Newcastle progressed to the second group stage in unlikely circumstances, beating Italian squad Juventus 1–0 along the way. United finished the 2002–03 season third in the Premier League, but lost their Champions League qualifier and played in the 2003–04 UEFA Cup instead, reaching the semi-final. In 2003–04, Newcastle finished fifth in the Premiership, lower than in previous seasons, and outside of Champions League contention.

Robson was then sacked following a poor start to the 2004–05 season and alleged discontent in the dressing room. In his autobiography, Robson was critical of Shepherd, claiming that while manager he was denied information regarding the players' contracts and transfer negotiations. He had previously publicly criticised the club's highly financed offer for Wayne Rooney, which the club later claimed they could not afford, stating young players were making excessive demands without first proving themselves on the pitch. He also criticised Shepherd and the club's deputy chairman Douglas Hall for their focus on the first team and St James' Park, causing them to neglect less glamorous issues, such as the training ground, youth development and talent scouts.

Graeme Souness replaced Robson and finished the season 14th in the league. Souness' arrival, however, was met with mixed reactions, with many expecting Robson being a hard task to improve upon, despite insisting he was aware of Sir Bobby's admiration and was ready for the role. In the January transfer window, Souness caused controversy in securing an £8 million bid for France international Jean-Alain Boumsong, who had joined Rangers for free just months before, prior to which Sir Bobby had travelled to France to review Boumsong but declined to sign him. The Stevens inquiry in 2007 documented that in this purchase Souness was accused of lack of consistency and was reviewed over the large media speculation the transfer received, but was eventually exonerated from any illegal participations. Going into 2005–06 season, despite signing several new players, including the return of Nolberto Solano from Aston Villa as well as Albert Luque from Deportivo de La Coruña for £10 million, Souness struggled with the opening games. He later blamed the state of the club's training ground for injuries suffered to players. The signing of Michael Owen (for a club record £17 million from Real Madrid) and his strike partnership with Alan Shearer produced goals at the end of 2005, but an injury caused Owen to miss the rest of the season and following a poor start to the new year, Souness was sacked in February 2006. Robbie Elliiot and Shay Given announced regret over his exit in the club's Season Review DVD but acknowledged his seeming favouritism of players and the amounting pressure on him damaged morale, whilst Alan Shearer blamed the injury crisis to first-team players.

Caretaker manager Glenn Roeder was issued the role of temporary first-team manager, seeing his first game against Portsmouth secure Alan Shearer's 201st goal for Newcastle United, becoming the club's all-time highest-scoring player. Roeder guided Newcastle from 15th to seventh place securing 32 league points from a possible 45 by the end of 2005–06, as well as securing a place in the UEFA Intertoto Cup and was given a two-year contract by chairman Freddy Shepherd. His appointment caused controversy, as at the time he did not hold the necessary UEFA Pro Licence to manage in the UEFA leagues and cup tournaments His role, however, was approved by UEFA who acknowledged that Roeder's diagnosis with a brain tumour in 2003 prevented him from developing his career, whilst Chairman Freddy Shepherd also fulfilled UEFA's request that he gain backing from all 19 other Premier League clubs to appoint him as manager. Alan Shearer retired at the end of the 2005–06 season scoring a record 206 goals.

Roeder encountered a difficult 2006–07 season, losing many players to injury, in particular Michael Owen, who had severely damaged his ligaments during the 2006 FIFA World Cup seeing him only play the final two games of the season. Newcastle won the 2006 Intertoto Cup, but a 5–1 exit to Birmingham City in the FA Cup, a round of 16 exit in the UEFA Cup and poor league results seeing a 13th-place finish led Roeder to resign in May 2007.

New ownership and relegation (2007–2010)
As the 2007 season drew to a close, St James Holdings Limited, the bid vehicle of billionaire businessman Mike Ashley, was reported to be in the process of buying the club. Ashley successfully acquired Sir John Hall's majority stake in the club in May 2007, leaving many to believe chairman Freddie Shepherd was set to depart after stepping down as chairman, should Ashley acquire more than 50 percent, which would see Shepherd no longer in control of the club and Ashley able to replace the board. Shepherd dismissed all speculation and proceeded to appoint ex-Bolton Wanderers boss Sam Allardyce as Newcastle manager, but eventually met with Mike Ashley and the board on 29 May. On 7 June 2007, Shepherd ended his 11 years with the club after Mike Ashley accepted his bid to buy his shares and in his role as chairman of the board, also having Shepherd advise the remaining shareholders to sell to Ashley. Ashley then announced he would be delisting the club from the London Stock Exchange upon completion of the takeover. The club officially ceased trading on the Stock Exchange as of 8am on 18 July 2007 at 5p a share. Ashley brought in lawyer Chris Mort as the new club "deputy chairman".

Despite signing and building a seemingly strong squad, Sam Allardyce soon became widely unpopular with fans and players alike, and was surprisingly sacked by Ashley halfway through his first season after underwhelming results and pressure from the fans. Ashley, however, defended his decision to sack Allardyce, stating he made a mistake in not appointing his own choice of manager before the season started.

Kevin Keegan then made a sensational surprise return as manager. His return had an instant impact on club ticket sales as he sat with the fans, Mike Ashley and Chris Mort for the FA Cup replay 4–1 win against Stoke City. Following his return, Keegan had a disappointing first ten games back, with the club not winning a single game until his decision to include strikers Obafemi Martins, Michael Owen and Mark Viduka into a 4–3–3 formation, which saw the club back on goal-scoring and winning form and eventually finishing 12th in 2007–08. In May Keegan met with Mike Ashley and Director of Football Dennis Wise after he had suggested Champions League qualification was out of Newcastle United's reach and expressed dissatisfaction with the board's financial backing. Ashley was battling reports that he had lost hundreds of millions of pounds in a disastrous attempt to rescue bank HBOS. The morning following, after the club's 3–0 defeat to Arsenal, rumours were circulating that Keegan had either been sacked or resigned as Newcastle boss, citing board interference and his lack of control over transfers. Keegan confirmed the reports the same week, and reportedly held unsuccessful resolution talks with Mike Ashley the following week, leading to fan fury and protests around St James' Park, and marring the club's home defeat to Hull City, with fans accusing Ashley and club executives Dennis Wise, Tony Jimenez and Derek Llambias of forcing Keegan out.

Following mass media coverage of Keegan's departure, the club struggled to find a replacement, with the majority of managers showing no interest in the role. Ashley released a statement to the club's fans that in fear of his and his families reputation and safety, he was placing the club for sale. It was then announced that former Nottingham Forest manager Joe Kinnear was appointed temporary manager His appointment, however, saw a backlash from fans, prompting a verbal tirade from Kinnear at the media, who questioned his decision to take the job at such a time. By the end of the year, Ashley took the club off the market claiming he was unable to find a suitable buyer.

In the remainder of 2008–09, Kinnear won four out of 18 matches before stepping down due to reported heart problems. Chris Hughton then took temporary charge before Alan Shearer returned to Newcastle United as manager in April with Iain Dowie as his assistant. After winning only one out of eight games, the club was relegated to the Championship for the first time since 1992. Mike Ashley then re-issued his desire to sell the club once again and issued a £100 million sale price tag.

Prior to the start of the 2009–10 season, Keegan's dispute with the club was resolved after a Premier League Arbitration Panel ruled that he had been misled to believe he had the final word on the club's transfer policy when in fact Director of Football Dennis Wise had been handed such control. The signings of Xisco and Nacho González were ruled to have been made without the manager's approval; with González, Dennis Wise signed him only after viewing him off of YouTube. Wise and Derek Llambias were ruled to have deliberately misled the media to believe Keegan had the final say, which amounted to constructive dismissal. Keegan was awarded £2 million in compensation and re-offered his job as Newcastle United manager under fresh new terms, though in response to the offer, he stated the fans had "had enough" for the time being and declined. He stated in 2013 he would consider a return should Mike Ashley leave the club.

Return to Premier League and second relegation (2010–2016)
Chris Hughton was appointed full-time manager early in the 2009–10 season. The club dominated the Championship, winning 30 games, drawing 12 and losing only four, scoring a total of 90 goals and finishing top of the league with 102 points, thus re-gaining Premier League status at the first attempt.

Beginning 2010–11, Hughton remained on course to secure survival from relegation with the club's first win at the Emirates over Arsenal, and a memorable 5–1 defeat over Sunderland. However, fury once again was caused by the board, as the club controversially sacked Chris Hughton after a 3–1 defeat to West Bromwich Albion on 6 December 2010. Critics players and fans alike were shocked by Hughton's dismissal, leading to protests prior to the club's game against Liverpool in a bid to thank him for his work and support. Alan Pardew was then announced as being appointed manager on a five-and-a-half-year contract, with the club announcing they wanted a manager with more experience. Pardew stated he had nothing but respect for Chris Hughton and acknowledged the fact that other managers questioned his appointment. He secured his first win on his debut as manager with a 3–1 win over Liverpool On 31 January 2011, Newcastle sold striker Andy Carroll to Liverpool for a club record of £35 million. The sale of a young player at a high value proved controversial for Liverpool, with Alan Shearer ridiculing the price Liverpool paid as well as expressing sorrow at Newcastle for losing Carroll. Carroll himself stated that he did not want to leave the club but was forced out by the club's directors after Liverpool's final offer of £35 million; the board responded that Carroll had previously handed in a transfer request. Pardew said he was disappointed to lose Carroll, but pledged to invest in the club's summer transfer window. The remainder of the season saw Leon Best score a hat-trick on his debut in a 5–0 defeat of West Ham United, a memorable 4–4 comeback against Arsenal, and a 4–1 defeat of Wolverhampton Wanderers, eventually finishing 12th in the league.

Entering 2011–12, Pardew was reportedly denied the £35 million from the sale of Andy Carroll for transfers and told to sell players to raise funds, having claimed he had been assured the finances upon Carroll's departure. Kevin Keegan had previously stated Alan Pardew should not have expected the money following his issues with the board in 2008. The club signed many French-speaking players in the transfer window, including Yohan Cabaye, Mathieu Debuchy, Sylvain Marveaux and Demba Ba. and with impressive results throughout the season, Newcastle finished fifth.

In the 2012–13 UEFA Europa League, Newcastle reached the quarter-finals, and in the January transfer window, the French revolution continued into the new year, with Moussa Sissoko and Yoan Gouffran joining the squad. The team, however, had a poor 2012–13 Premier League and finished 16th in the Premier League.

Beginning the 2013–14 season, in a surprise move Joe Kinnear returned to the club as Director of Football, instantly causing fan fury following his outburst that he was "more intelligent" than the fans and critics, as well as mispronouncing various players names during a radio interview. However, he resigned after just eight months on the job following further critique for managing to sign only two players on loan—Loïc Rémy and Luuk de Jong—throughout the season's summer and January transfer windows, as well selling Yohan Cabaye to Paris Saint-Germain for £20 million, considered to be one of the most influential players at the time. Following the lack of transfer activity, Mike Ashley once again faced a fan revolt, with protests being launched at him to sell the club, and entered a dispute with several media titles whom the club banned from Newcastle United media facilities, press conferences and player interviews, declaring stories reported were intensely exaggerated and aimed only to damage Ashley's image further. Throughout the season, the club remained on course to ensure a top half finish, notably defeating Manchester United at Old Trafford for the first time since 1972. Nonetheless, the team struggled for goals following the sale of Cabaye. Further dismay upon the season was caused when Pardew was banned for seven matches and fined £100,000 for an assault on Hull City midfielder David Meyler. The club then encountered a poor run of form, losing eight out of ten games and finishing the season tenth in the league, though the club confirmed Alan Pardew would stay on.

The opening eight games of the 2014–15 season proved disappointing, with the club failing to secure a win. After the dip in form, however, the club had an emphatic resurgence, seeing a five-game unbeaten run whilst also surprising League Cup holders Manchester City with a 2–0 win and progressing to the quarter-finals of the tournament. Pardew, however, resigned from the club on 30 December 2014 following immense pressure from fans calling for his departure, with many posters at games designed with the Sports Direct logo advertising a website demanding his resignation. Pardew admitted in the months leading up to his departure that protests from the fans were affecting his family and was subsequently feeling unhappy at the club. He was replaced by his assistant manager John Carver, though the team subsequently earned just 13 points out of a possible 50, surviving relegation on the final day of the season with a victory over West Ham, Carver was dismissed before the club's pre-season for 2016 began. The club paid tribute to player Jonás Gutiérrez following his successful recovery from testicular cancer to resume his playing career.

Beginning the 2015–16 season, former England F.C. Manager Steve McClaren was appointed manager, signing Georginio Wijnaldum, Aleksandar Mitrovic, Chancel Mbemba, Florian Thauvin, Henri Saivet, Jonjo Shelvey, Andros Townsend and Ivan Toney. McClaren however struggled to produce results winning 6 and drawing 6 out of 28 games, whilst exiting both the FA Cup and League Cup in the Third Round. McClaren was subsequently sacked on 11 March 2016 with critics and former players voicing their favour of the decision. Rafael Benítez was announced as McClaren's successor the same day, signing a three-year deal. Benítez recorded his first victory in 3–0 defeat of Swansea City in the Premier League on 17 April 2016 after 5 games in charge, and maintained an emphatic 5-game unbeaten streak to the end of the season. Newcastle were however relegated from the Premier League along with Aston Villa and Norwich finishing 18th place, 2 points below safety. Betting websites confirmed after the final game that the club's 5–1 defeat of Tottenham Hotspur matched the initial odds of Leicester City's 5000/1 win of the 2015–16 Premier League season.

Championship win, return to Premier League (2016–2021)
Starting the 2016-17 season, Rafa Benítez signed 12 new players full-time and also acquired 5 players on loan, whilst 8 players left the club and another 12 on loan. New signings Dwight Gayle and Matt Ritchie proved popular scoring a combined total of 39 goals, finishing among the top goalscorers that season. Despite failing to improve on their dominant success in the 2009/10 championship season, the club remained in contention for the trophy throughout; threatened only by Brighton & Hove Albion Newcastle enjoyed a 3-game winning streak to the final day of the season and lifted the Football League Championship trophy on 8 May 2017 following a 3–0 win over Barnsley. Rafa Benítez denied speculation that he would leave the club following promotion to the Premier League and confirmed his commitment to the club for the foreseeable future. Shortly prior to the season's finish, the club was subject to raids by HMRC following suspicions of tax evasion. Managing Director Lee Charnley was arrested during the raid, but was later released without charge.

Ending the 2017-18 season, the club finished 10th in the Premier League defeating the current champions Chelsea on the final day of the season, the highest finish achieved within 4 years. Beginning the 2018–19 season, Mike Ashley again came under scrutiny following lack of major signings in the summer transfer window, with many fans accusing him of lacking interest in the club following his purchase of troubled retail chain House of Fraser for £90m. Despite the January signing of Miguel Almirón from Atlanta United FC for £21 million surpassing the club's transfer record fee of £16.8 million for Michael Owen in 2005, the club struggled throughout the season with 12 wins, 9 draws and 17 losses seeing a 13th place league table finish, whilst exiting the League Cup at the 2nd round in a 3–1 defeat of Nottingham Forest F.C and a 4th round exit of the FA Cup in a 2–0 defeat to Watford F.C. The season also saw heavy speculation regarding Rafa Benítez remaining at the club following reports he was still in negotiations following the end of the season.

Following fresh reports of Ashley's intention to sell the club, Sheikh Khaled Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, Founder and Chairman of The Bin Zayed Group of Companies, a member of the Al Nahyan royal family of Abu Dhabi, confirmed he had agreed terms to purchase the club for £350 million. On 5 June 2019 a company named Monochrome Acquisitions Limited was registered in Nahyan's name, whilst managing director Lee Charnley applied to have four companies linked to Ashley's company St James Holdings Ltd struck off, leaving many to believe the club was on course to be sold. Talks of a takeover however stalled throughout the summer transfer window, whilst Ashley confirmed he had not received an official bid from any prospective buyer.

Benítez rejected a new contract offer and departed the club on 30 June 2019, accepting a move to Chinese Super League side Dalian Yifang in a £12 million deal. Ashley criticised Benítez stating unfair demands were made making it impossible for him to remain as manager. Notable player departures saw Salomón Rondón join Benitez at Dalian Yifang after returning to West Bromwich Albion F.C. from loan, whilst Ayoze Perez joined Leicester City for £30 million and Mohamed Diamé was released by Newcastle upon the expiry of his contract at the end of the 2018–19 season.

BBC Sport reported in July 2019 that Steve Bruce had resigned from his managerial position at Sheffield Wednesday after he earlier admitted that he had held talks with Newcastle United over their managerial vacancy. His appointment was confirmed on 17 July. Sheffield Wednesday however stated there were still outstanding legal issues with Bruce having resigned just 48 hours before, leading a report being filed to the Premier League alleging misconduct in his appointment. Newcastle United denied any wrongdoing and stated they were confident no case could be escalated. Reaction from the fans was mixed, with some feeling Bruce would not achieve the standard set by Benítez, whilst his recent lack of Premier League football and management of rival club Sunderland proved controversial. Bruce later acknowledged Benítez's popularity and stated he hoped the fans would not rush to judgement and give him time to prove himself and manager of Newcastle. Due to visa problems in China, Bruce watched his first match as manager from the stands which saw Newcastle achieve a third-place finish in the pre-season 2019 Premier League Asia Trophy following a 1–0 victory over West Ham United F.C. Bruce quickly made his first transfer, signing Joelinton from TSG 1899 Hoffenheim for £40 million, breaking the club's transfer fee record previously held by Miguel Almirón at £21 million just 6 months before, before signing French international winger Allan Saint-Maximin from OGC Nice on a permanent deal for £16.5 million, Sweden international defender Emil Krafth for £5 million, central midfielder Kyle Scott on a free signing following his departure from Chelsea, and Netherlands international defender Jetro Willems on loan from Frankfurt F.C until the end of the 2019–20 season. Bruce made his final transfer of the pre-season on deadline day by re-signing striker Andy Carroll, who had left the club over 7 years earlier. On 4 February 2020, Steve Bruce's side ended a 14-year drought by reaching the 5th round of the FA Cup they beat League One side Oxford United 2–3 in a replay thanks to a late winner from Allan Saint-Maximin in extra time.

From March 2020, the season was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. On 13 March, following an emergency meeting between the Premier League, The Football Association (FA), the English Football League and the FA Women's Super League, it was unanimously decided to suspend professional football in England. On 19 March, the suspension was extended indefinitely, with a restart date of 17 June announced in late May with all remaining games to be played without crowd attendance.

Newcastle finished the season in 13th place. Defender Danny Rose was an outspoken critic of the decision to continue the season, citing the virus was still in major circulation and accused the FA of having no concern for footballers' health. Karl Darlow has since urged players at the club to get vaccinated following his hospitalisation from complications of Covid, whilst manager Steve Bruce admitted some players had voluntarily declined the vaccination.

The 2020-21 season saw all matches played without crowd attendance until May 2021, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. Newcastle failed to improve on the previous season, finishing 12th in the premier league and were knocked out of the FA Cup in the third round added time to Arsenal and exited the EFL Cup in the quarter-finals losing 1–0 to Brentford.

New ownership (2021–present)
In April 2020, it was widely reported that a consortium consisting of Public Investment Fund, PCP Capital Partners and the Reuben Brothers, was finalising an offer to acquire Newcastle United. The proposed sale prompted concerns and criticism, such as arguments considering it sportwashing of the country's human rights record, as well as ongoing large-scale piracy of sports broadcasts in the region. However the consortium announced its withdrawal from the Newcastle deal on July 30, 2020, after multiple media reports highlighted realm as the staunch violator of human rights, and the WTO ruled that it was behind the piracy campaign using pirate-pay-service beoutQ. "With a deep appreciation for the Newcastle community and the significance of its football club, we have come to the decision to withdraw our interest in acquiring Newcastle United Football Club," the group said in its statement upon withdrawal. The group also stated that the "prolonged process" was a major factor in them pulling out. The collapse of the takeover was met with widespread criticism from Newcastle fans, with Newcastle MP Chi Onwurah accusing the Premier League of treating fans of the club with "contempt" and subsequently wrote to Masters for an explanation. Despite the consortium's withdrawal, disputes over the takeover continued. On 9 September 2020, Newcastle United released a statement claiming that the Premier League had officially rejected the takeover by the consortium and accused Masters and the Premier League board of "[not] acting appropriately in relation to [the takeover]", while stating that the club would be considering any relevant legal action. The Premier League strongly denied this in a statement released the next day, expressing "surprise" and "disappointment" at Newcastle's statement.

On October 7, 2021, the Public Investment Fund, PCP Capital Partners and RB Sports & Media confirmed that they had officially completed the acquisition of Newcastle United. Governor of the investment fund Yasir bin Othman Al-Rumayyan was appointed non-executive chairman, whilst Amanda Staveley and Jamie Reuben were both appointed as directors and each held a 10% shareholding in the club.

The takeover led to widespread speculation that manager Steve Bruce was expected to leave the club. Although not denying the speculation that the club was keen to appoint a new manager, Staveley stated Bruce was to remain for the new owners first game against Tottenham Hotspur; his 1000th match as a football manager. However following Newcastle losing the game 3-2 and alleged discontent among the players, Bruce left the club by mutual consent. Bruce stated his sadness at leaving the club and felt Newcastle fans launched unnecessary verbal abuse at him during his time there. Interim manager Graeme Jones as well as Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta supported Bruce's claims stating the abuse he received was off putting for other managers to take the role.

Eddie Howe was appointed as manager on 8 November 2021. The announcement was made following reports that the club had discussed the role with him the previous week and confirmed following his attendance at the away draw to Brighton & Hove Albion. On 19 November 2021, Newcastle announced that Howe had tested positive for COVID-19 and would miss his first game in charge, which instead forced him to watch his first game as manager from a hotel room as Newcastle drew 3–3 with Brentford on 20 November.

Lee Charnley, who acted as Managing Director under Ashley's ownership, left the club on 19 November 2021 following a six-week handover period. His departure was the final of Mike Ashley's hierarchy, with Staveley stating the club was undergoing a "formal process" to appoint a new figure to replace the role.

Eddie Howe had to wait until 4 December 2021 for his first win as Newcastle manager in a 1–0 win against Burnley, which was also the first win since the takeover happened. Howe then made five signings in the first January transfer window under the new ownership which included a marquee singing in Brazilian midfielder Bruno Guimarães from Olympique Lyonnais. The transfer window and the players that were already there that Howe improved helped Newcastle to go on a 9-game unbeaten run in the Premier League to get them 10 points clear from the relegation zone and increasing the chance of guaranteeing survival. After Newcastle's 1–0 win against Crystal Palace, this was the first time the club had managed to win 6 home games in a row since 2004 when Sir Bobby Robson was in charge. Newcastle finished in 11th place after a run of 12 wins in their final 18 games, and became the first team in Premier League history to avoid relegation after not winning any of the first 14 games they played.

On 30 May 2022, the club announced they had reached an agreement of a compensation fee with Brighton & Hove Albion to appoint Dan Ashworth as the new Sporting Director, the appointment was confirmed on 6 June 2022. On 15 July 2022, the club brought in Darren Eales, from MLS side Atlanta United, as the club's new Chief Executive Officer - acting as a "key member of the club's leadership structure".

Chairman history
As of 2021

Owners history
Newcastle United was set up as a private company limited by shares on 6 September 1895. However, by the 1930s, ownership of the company was dominated by a small number of individuals: Alderman William McKeag, George and Robert Rutherford, and William Westwood, 1st Baron Westwood. George Stanley Seymour was allocated some shares when he joined the board in 1938.

By the second half of the 20th century, these shareholdings had passed to the next generation: Gordon McKeag, Robert James Rutherford, Stan Seymour Jr. and William Westwood, 2nd Baron Westwood. The Magpie Group led by Sir John Hall built up a large shareholding in the club and then took control in 1992. In 2007, St James Holdings Limited, the bid vehicle of billionaire businessman Mike Ashley, secured control of the club, and in 2021, the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia, PCP Capital Partners and RB Sports & Media confirmed that they had acquired ownership of the club. In July 2024, Staveley and her husband resigned as owner of the club

title: History of Newcastle United F.C.


text:
Rangali

Rangali is an island in Alif Dhaal Atoll, Maldives.

It is the location for the 151 room Conrad Maldives Rangali Island resort, which has twice been voted the best hotel in the world.

It is known for its underwater restaurant Ithaa.

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

title: Rangali


text:
Rangalifinolhu

Rangalifinolhu is one of the uninhabited islands of Alif Dhaal Atoll.

A smaller adjoining island (Rangali) is linked by a 500-metre footbridge. Both islands are currently occupied by Conrad Maldives Resort & Spa.

title: Rangalifinolhu


text:
Talk:Mont Pelerin Society

top
I find it odd that the national socialist Karl Brandt was listed as a visitor, not only because it was a libertarian meeting, but especially as he was being tried for war crimes in Nürnberg at the time. I'd suggest that someone go trough the entire list of people who attended the meeting as the person who added him was the one who added them as well.

 * Well, there was a Karl Brandt at the meeting, but it wasn't the Nazi war criminal. That has now been fixed.  -- Eb.hoop 20:41, 28 January 2006 (UTC).

--When reading Henry Hazlitt's desription of the first Mont Pelerin meeting, he mentions Ludwig von Mises as the main critic of Hayek's original choice of name. As Frank Knight is the only person mentioned in the article as protesting against it, I felt I should add a reference. Cedric du Zob 12:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

small note...
Well Henry Simons may have been invited but he died the year before, so either Von Hayek didn't know this, mailed his invites really early, or the page is wrong on that one. In any case, it reads as if he actually attended, which would have been difficult to do considering his death and all.... though this group of old men did believe in invisible hands.

Also, instead of Henry Simons, Friedman himself was there personally. There are pictures of him hanging out there on the Mont Pelerin website from the first meeting.

And last but not least, this page doesn't make this group sound evil enough.... I know, I know... that's just my opinion. But come on! These guys promote and fund think tanks all over the world dedicated to an economic system with no regulation proven to be a disaster for everyone except those on top (like them!)

Ok.... that's it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.82.113.29 (talk) 00:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hayek was quite aware of Henry Simons' demise, here's a quote from his "Opening Address to a Conference at Mont Pelerin":
 * [...] I must also mention others on whose support I had particularly counted but who will never again be with us. Indeed the two men with whom I had most fully discussed the plan for this meeting both have not lived to see its realisation.  I had first sketched the plan three years ago to a small group in Cambridge presided over by Sir John Clapham who took a great interest in it but who died suddenly a year ago.  And it is now less than a year since I discussed the plan in all its detail with another man whose whole life has been devoted to the ideals and problems with which we shall be concerned: Henry Simons of Chicago.  A few weeks later he was no more.

I've edited the page to clarify this. Sergei Vavinov (talk) 20:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Comment
The MPS is a very evil and conspiratorial organization. There are many conspiracy theories about the MPS, most of which are complete nonsense. The multiple conspiracy theories by an assortment of crazies and oddballs have been quite convenient in providing camouflage for a truly evil and very successful program which has been very successful. They have managed in implementing their policies in a very wide variety of countries by very anti-democratic means. One amusing thing about the organization and their members is that despite their professed belief in the 'open society' the MPS has always been and remains a highly secretive organization. Extreme secrecy surrounds their meetings, which are by invitation only. It is very difficult for outsiders to find out what goes on or to read any of the papers presented. The full membership is also secret. And most members would not divulge that they are members, least people start to put 'two and two' together, and question the appropriateness of their membership. They have always had a policy of trying to infiltrate all sides of politics, academia, the private and public sectors, so that their policies will be implemented regardless of who voters choose, and without anyone being aware of where they came from. If they actually believed in the 'open society' they would simply be a political party and not have tried, and unfortunately succeeded, in implementing their evil agenda in such an underhanded and anti-democratic way. And of course, they are not a Swiss organization. It was simply a coincidence that they had their first meeting in Switzerland. As they couldn't agree on the name for their organization they finally settled on Mont Pèlerin Society, Mont Pèlerin simply happening to be where they had happened to hold that first meeting. Therefore the connection to Switzerland is simply silly. I fully agree with the suggestion below that the outing of the membership would be highly desirable. Of course, given their secrecy and anti-democratic agenda, verifiability will always be a problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.161.3.174 (talk) 16:29, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

suggestions...
First, the MPS is not a Swiss organisation. They just happened to have their first meeting in Switzerland. There was no special reason for choosing to meet there. Hence, it should not be identified as a 'Swiss organisation'. The MPS has no permanent headquarters or staff. See: http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=1065&chapter=115590&layout=html&Itemid=27 for example. Second, the MPS has had an incredible influence on policy in the west - even though few have heard of it. Few have heard of it because they do keep a very low profile and most of the members keep quiet about their membership, and their meetings are closed. This secrecy has helped to increase their influence. This is a secrecy that is very undemocratic for a society that seeks to mold public policy and, some would argue, antithetical to their purported values. Identifying and listing members would be a significant contribution that this or other wikipedia pages could make. Another anti-democratic aspect of their operations is that they do not seek to have their policies adopted by convincing the public but rather by influencing those who have power, bureaucrats, business leaders and those likely to gain the reins of political power. They do this by mentoring those they think will move into positions of influence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.146.148 (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Hoppe
Who cares what that dude thinks? This section should be eliminated. He and the things he has done are irrelevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.95.16.186 (talk) 00:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

 * I would tend to agree; it isn't clear what makes his crit notable. But there should be some crit. William M. Connolley (talk) 11:07, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

1962 dispute/resignations
A few biographical articles on the English Wikipedia (but not this article), and the German version of this article, allude to a significant philosophical dispute in 1962, which led to the resignation of the ordoliberal wing of the organization (including then-president Wilhelm Röpke), and a resulting significant shift in direction. I have seen this referenced as the "Hunold affair", after one of the resigning members who wrote a polemic against Hayek. It would be interesting to have some of this covered in the history section, and more generally to have the organization's intellectual history better mapped (e.g. it seems like its views in the 1950s vs. the 1960s/70s shifted considerably). --Delirium (talk) 12:53, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I dont see much significance. The dispute between the ordoliberals and the neoliberals is older than the Mont Pelerin Society. Hayek wrote polemics against ordoliberal ideas befor the 60s. In case of "social justice" you could even call his writings pamphlets. I always wondered why they where so very interested in eachother, nomatter they belonged to very different "schools" of economics that more or less only had the term liberal in common. I would agree that the intellectual history would need some clarifications but i think Hayek was much to the contrary actually trying to disguise the differences, so liberalism could stand as paramount united political entity against socialism. Unfortunately most of the literature about political ideology, especially the literature about the history of neoliberalism, seems to follow in Hayeks footsteps. Infact the differences between ordo- and neoliberalism only became a topic in literature again after the Soviet Union broke up and all the liberals thought therefor socialism was dead. Infact it seems it took literature from 1930 till 2001 (Varieties of Capitalism) to make official notice that there where to much fundamental differences to sell both, coordinated market economies (Ordoliberalism, "Rhine Capitalism") and liberal market economies (Neoliberalism, "Anglo-Saxon model"), as one (liberal) brand. Worse even, many still try this today. --Kharon (talk) 10:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mont Pelerin Society. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070306125314/http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=4030 to http://www.fee.org/publications/the-freeman/article.asp?aid=4030

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:00, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Criticism section
There should be a criticism section, but currently it only discusses Hoppe (who as far as I am aware was never a member of the MPS), which is WP:UNDUE. Currently, I don't have time to rectify this, so I have moved it to the talk page per WP:PRESERVE. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 09:47, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

== Criticism == In 2006, libertarian/anarcho-capitalist and Austrian School Hans-Hermann Hoppe founded the Property and Freedom Society as a reaction against what he perceived to be the Mont Pelerin Society's drift towards "socialism." Hoppe stated that individuals, whom he did not identify, had been "skeptical concerning the Mont Pelerin Society from the beginning" in 1947. He said that Ludwig von Mises had doubted as to whether "a society filled with certified state-interventionists" could pursue libertarian ideals.

 * There is no rule demanding critics of an organization to be part of it. Additionally many members of the MPS seem intellectually completely insignificant to the discourse the MPS claims to represent. Mr. Charles G. Koch for example, who is very, very, very rich but far as i know never "donated" anything intellectual to the world. So its very strange to then demand a high significance according WP:UNDUE. Must that atleast be bought or isnt it already significant enough that disputed Mr. Hoppe founded a competing organization to the MPS that has been found worthy of its own wikipedia article? --Kharon (talk) 02:50, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

 * K: you seem to be letting your hatred of Koch influence your editing, which is bad. I too think the current (well, now not-current, since I've removed it) criticism section is bad. Containing only the views of Hoppe makes no sense (see my "Hoppe" section, earlier). Also, while H may be notable enough to have his own article, that doesn't make his views of MPS notable William M. Connolley (talk) 07:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, i am for free speech including Billionairs, their Lobbyists and other people that make no scientific or intellectual sense. As long as they are part of the discourse they can be mentioned. It just struck me that Mr. Charles G. Koch was mentioned in the chapter "noted members" despite he "rarely grants media interviews and prefers to keep a low profile" and made no scientific contributions (far as i know).
 * Contrary to Mr. Koch Mr. Hans-Hermann Hoppe obviously made a lot of scientific and intellectual contributions, yet he was cut out. Who am i to judge if one or the other make sense? To me the whole Mont Pelerin Society is a senseless debate club (8D) yet i would always vote against deleting or cutting down the article. --Kharon (talk) 10:07, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:FREESPEECH (edit: WP:NOTFREESPEECH is the policy)—WP:NOTFORUM might be useful too.
 * Hoppe isn't especially well-known, or someone with a great deal of influence. Dedicating an entire section to his opinions on the MPS is the definition of WP:UNDUE. Mr Hoppe founded his Property and Freedom Society in reaction to the alleged "socialism" of the MPS—an organisation he was never invited to join. If this page is to have a criticism section, this cannot be all it contains.
 * Mr Koch is mentioned in his capacity as a highly influential member of the MPS. Your opinion of him is irrelevant. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 23:27, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I am wikipedian since 2006. I stopped reading rules other wikipedians point me to. I read them all. Im not using this page as a forum. Else i would tell you to try soaring and psychedelic mushrooms befor you get to old for that. I was accused of hating Mr. Charles G. Koch, felt missunderstood and had to clear up my opinion of Mr Koch. Its irrelevant alone but in the case someone accuses me of a bias i think i may set that right.
 * Both Hans-Hermann Hoppe and the Property and Freedom Society have wikipedia articles. That implies they are known well and "influencial" enough to be cited and/or mentioned. You keep ignoring that obviously and prefer to make your personal view about Mr. Hoppe count. Read some wikipedia rules yourself. --Kharon (talk) 01:22, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Charles G. Koch is an obviously notable member of the MPS. Hoppe's criticisms of the society are not notable in isolation. However much you WP:LIKE Hoppe, and believe other people mentioned in the article to be "intellectually completely insignificant", this isn't a basis for including the paragraph above. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 10:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

 * You joined English Wikipedia in 2013 (the policies and guidelines of which differ to those on German Wikipedia), have spent most of your time at the Reference desks, and in that time have made nearly as many edits as I have since last year. It is impossible that you are at all times completely familiar with the 60 or so site policies, and the dozens of associated guidelines, and insisting that you are looks dreadful. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 10:10, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * This page is meant for issues in the connected article. For personal issues everyone has a personal discussion page, as you know but obviously fail to understand. I propose you cut out your text passages addressing me and put them on my discussionpage. Your ad hominem rambling - just delete it. --Kharon (talk) 16:30, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

You could take your own advice there. I'm not going to respond any further here, because you don't understand why the WP:UNDUE emphasis on Hoppe is inappropriate, or that "free speech" is not a basis for including material in an article, or that your opinion of anyone mentioned in this article is not a basis for including or excluding commentary on them. You have also admitted that you won't take any advice given to you, or read any site policies or guidelines. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 18:07, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

 * Again, i have no religious like preferences for one school of ideology. Please stop insisting otherwise. Besides i would actually count Mr. Koch and Mr. Hoppe as members of the same "school", which seems to be Anarcho-capitalism for both, with Hoppe's Paleolibertarianism just being a slight "color offset" of that. So it doesnt even make sense intellectually to prefere one and despise the other as you insinuate. Nomatter i added something with more reputation and more serious intellectual challenge now, as you have noticed. So the initial dispute is solved in my view. --Kharon (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Controversies section
It seems my fellow wikipedian who edit this article have some trouble with documented facts, especially if they are critical. I added 2 first class sources. Did you actually read the few pages they refer to? --Kharon (talk) 22:49, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, isn't the problem here. Inserting a reference to a book which also refers to the Nobel Prize for Economics in inverted commas does not justify your use of inverted commas to refer to the prize in this article. To preempt what is probably coming next, finding a source which suggests that the Nobel Prize for Economics is not a "real" Nobel Prize isn't acceptable either. Here, we use WP:SECONDARY sources, and summarise them. We don't re-state contentious claims/opinions in WP:PRIMARY sources. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 23:00, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Its even explicitly refereed to as (cite) socalled "Nobel Prize"(end cite) in this biography. Biographies are Non-fiction, usually history, literature which usually implies the highest requirements on validity and relevance of used sources. Also Controversies are frequently opinions, not theories. The rules you try to use against this part of the article actually dont apply. Its one Point of view added so the article gets some balance! Besides the disputed source is actually a secondary source, which raises some doubt about if you actually read it or understand what you argue about! Please check up your argumentation. --Kharon (talk) 23:24, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I'll try one last time. When covering anything on Wikipedia related to people's opinions, you should provide a detached commentary, preferably relying on WP:SECONDARY sources. You should not state anyone's opinions as fact. Regardless of the merits of any particular source, you cannot re-state the opinions it expresses/cites as fact.
 * In using inverted commas here, you are expressing an opinion on the validity of the Nobel Prize for Economics. By citing Sylvia Nasar's quotation of Erik Dahman in support of your use of inverted commas, you are stating Erik Dahman's opinion of the Nobel Prize for Economics as fact. The only way you could use that source legitimately in this context would be if you wrote something roughly as follows: "Erik Dahman referred to the "so-called Nobel Prize in economics", and claimed that it was "not really a Nobel Prize". This wouldn't be notable commentary, however. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 00:07, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, i dont accept your unreasonable formal corset as intended by the wikipedia rules in this case. Your argument is artificially dogmatism and it seems from your earlier edits that its not actually a rule violation but the content you want to correct. But the disputed text is actually cited unchanged from the source given so the correction you want to apply is actually a manipulation, a falsification of the source. Besides both sources infact argue the same, that the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences is an abomination of the Nobel Prize! Its not unusual to combine sources and i dont see why one or the other miss relevance or are cited wrong. Contraty both sources have the highest reputation in science AND economics. If you dont like the message, that may be something you have to live with. --Kharon (talk) 00:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Btw. Mr. Erik Verner Harald Dahmen happens to be a member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences which awards the Nobel Prizes. You think his view is not notable? On the topic of Nobel Prizes i prefer to differ and the highly awarded bestseller scientific author Sylvia Nasar finds him notable too. Who are you to judge that!? --Kharon (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Btw.2 I can imagine that its a "tough cookie" to find your "holy grail" is not the original you thought it was. Life is a Beach...--Kharon (talk) 01:00, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * The last two comments are just nonsense. I won’t revert any further per 3RR, but be warned that you could be blocked for 24 hours for making four reverts in 24 hours. I’m contemplating seeking a topic ban for you at ANI on WP:CIR grounds based on what you have been doing here. L.R. Wormwood (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I can not stop you from calling in administration to enforce your point of view. Since i only cited reputable sources 1:1 i will argue that the deletions of cited content and their source is a form of Vandalism which i will always try to fix, no matter how often. --Kharon (talk) 01:16, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Involvement in 1973 Chilean coup d'état
Hello, Why does this article include nothing about the anti-democratic bent of the MPS and the involvement and approval of many of its members in the 1973 coup and the subsequent Pinochet regime? Buchanan specifically criticized fellow Mont Pelerin Society members, most prominently FA Hayek, for letting their concerns about "unlimited democracy" move them to support dictatorship. References:

1. Farrant, A., Tarko, V. James M. Buchanan’s 1981 visit to Chile: Knightian democrat or defender of the ‘Devil’s fix’?. Rev Austrian Econ 32, 1–20 (2019).

2. Caldwell, Bruce J. and Montes, Leonidas, Friedrich Hayek and His Visits to Chile (August 27, 2014). Center for the History of Political Economy (CHOPE) Working Paper No. 2014-12

Andro124 (talk) 18:26, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

 * Neither of your sources is anything obviously to do with MPS William M. Connolley (talk) 10:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mont Pelerin Society


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Gambino

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. — J I P | Talk 05:43, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Johnny Gambino
Delete. Forumcruft; see also Articles for deletion/Von Helson Sisters. --Idont Havaname 22:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep; This may be of interest more to Gaia fans than anyone else, but not so much that I'd class it as cruft. There are over 2 million registered members on Gaia - Even assuming that only 100 or 200 thousand are active, that's still enough to definitely qualify this as notable. (Edit: I should state, I do have an interest in the article, as I am the author.) Trisk 22:32, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure cruft DV8 2XL 22:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This is just fanfic by another name. Redirect to Gaia Online and add a mention there. This comment may not be interpreted as a desire to retain the content. -Splash 23:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC) Actually, on re-visiting this, just delete it. We'd only be piling the cruft up in a different place. -Splash 01:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete cruft. No redirect. Proto t c 10:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: User talk:216.146.88.250

title: User talk:216.146.88.250


text:
User talk:Nuketrino

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks.—chris.lawson (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nuketrino


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gino Gambino

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

The result of the debate was DELETE. — J I P | Talk 05:45, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Gino Gambino
Delete; nn forumcruft. See also Articles for deletion/Johnny Gambino and Articles for deletion/Von Helson Sisters. --Idont Havaname 22:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep; This may be of interest more to Gaia fans than anyone else, but not so much that I'd class it as cruft. There are over 2 million registered members on Gaia - Even assuming that only 100 or 200 thousand are active, that's still enough to definitely qualify this as notable. (Edit: I should state, I do have an interest in the article, as I am the author.) Trisk 22:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure cruft DV8 2XL 22:47, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * This is just fanfic by another name. Redirect to Gaia Online and add a mention there. This comment may not be interpreted as a desire to retain the content. -Splash 23:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC) Actually, on re-visiting this, just delete it. We'd only be piling the cruft up in a different place. -Splash 01:09, 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Forumcruft. --Carnildo 23:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete cruft. Proto t c 10:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Talk:ZanZarah: The Hidden Portal

Xbox & NGC
does anyone have packshots of the Xbox and Game Cube versions? because I don't think it has ever been release for any other platform than Windows-PCs. –jello ¿? 22:13, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I just took that info from the ESRB site, so don't blame me. ^^ --Koveras 22:15, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ZanZarah Map.jpg
Image:ZanZarah Map.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ZanZarah Logo.jpg
Image:ZanZarah Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:36, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Copyright issues?
The "History" section reads awfully like a copyright violation. It, and much of the rest of the article, was added in the first revision. I know that this can be done by dedicated writers, but it would be nice to have positive assurance that this is an original work. GreenReaper (talk) 05:13, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I can give you my honest word that I've written the entire article myself (since not a soul on Wikipedia gives a damn about this game, apparently), if that'd count... Otherwise, try finding "the original source" I've violated before accusing me. :P (If you do, I'll go straight to Funatics and apply for a writer's position. :D) Anyhow, looking back, the real problem of this article is that it contains too much fancruft and NPOV violations. :D --Koveras ☭ 10:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Source

 * https://archive.org/details/gamelivepc018/page/n55
 * https://archive.org/details/gamelivepc020/page/n81
 * https://archive.org/details/gamelivepc045/page/n35 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JimmyBlackwing (talk • contribs) 02:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Please explain what this is for. For one thing, the text is in Spanish. Dhtwiki (talk) 09:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I drop rare sources across Wikipedia talk pages as I locate them—usually taken from hard-to-reach archives of magazines and websites that I don't think other people will find. This is from the Spanish magazine GameLive PC, one of Spain's top game magazines during the first half of the 2000s. The source, dated November 2004, names ZanZarah one of 15 underappreciated gems released in recent years. As an aside, non-English sources are perfectly usable for English Wikipedia articles. In the case of European games like ZanZarah, I'd actually call them preferable. Here's the typed-up text for what GameLive said about ZanZarah, which can be input into Google Translate for a pretty accurate translation:
 * Mexcla en un mismo recipiente les elementos narrativos de Michael Ende, las preciosistas ilustraciones de Brian Froud y la adictiva mecanica de la saga consolera Pokemon obtendras algo muy parecido a Zanzarah. El objetivo? Capturar la mayor variedad da hadas posible. Como lograrlo? Explorando el entorno a la manera y usanza de Tomb Raider y participando en furiosos combates en primera persona que poco tienen que envidiar a los de Unreal Tournament. Todo ello, sin una sola gota de sangre.
 * For the record, the article is called "Pequeños Grandes Juegos: 15 joyas recientes que pasaron desapercibidas". Happy editing. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 13:46, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:ZanZarah: The Hidden Portal


text:
Vilamendhoo

Vilamendhoo, formerly one of the uninhabited islands of Alif Dhaal Atoll (South Ari Atoll) of the Maldives, has been developed into a 194-room 4 star plus resort, called Vilamendhoo Island Resort & Spa, managed by CCR (Crown & Champa Resorts). Some of the best diving points in Maldives are located in Ari Atoll.

Locale
Surrounded by a lagoon and long stretches of white, sandy beach, it is the only resort on the island, and measures about 670 x – 11 ha. Seaplane transfer from Male International Airport is a 25-minute flight. A reef encircles the island, with stray reef sprouts above and below.

Reef
Due to the rise in temperature caused by La Niña, the coral had died but is starting to recover.

Wildlife
Whilst there is much life in the ocean, there are also many exotic creatures living on the island.

title: Vilamendhoo


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Robchurch

Robchurch
[ Vote here] (34/11/4) ending 22:14 September_7 2005 (UTC) -

Rob Church has already been doing some advanced admin work, with among other things Ed Poors RFAr. He knows policy well enough, and kate's fine tool says he's safely past the 1500 edits required by those afflicted with edicountitis. :-) --Kim Bruning 22:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Candidate, please indicate acceptance of the nomination here: I accept, and am pleased to be considered as trustworthy enough for this position. Thank you, Kim. Rob Church Talk 22:43, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

Support

Oppose
 * 1) First one is always free. Kim Bruning 22:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) A good friend of mine, RobChurch is intelligent, reasonable and friendly, all three of which are vital to the success of admins in the field. He has proved himself invaluable in many respects, including mediation regarding the Ed Poor RfAr, and a primary founder of the WP:FAD project. I am certain that he would be a great asset to the community as an administrator, and I can grant my personal trust in his abilities. --NicholasTurnbull 22:34, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) I thought you were one. There were a few edits w/o summaries, but nothing bad... Ryan Norton T 22:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Support; would make excellent admin. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 23:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Support. Andre ( talk ) 23:31, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * 6) Support, an outstanding candidate. Rje 23:37, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Nuke from orbit. And if that doesn't work, support. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 23:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Extreme eggplant Mountain Dew that lesbians love support -- Phroziac (talk) 00:05, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Support Since no one else has used this yet "I can't believe he isn't one already". 75% is in my opinion a bit high in determining say, a VfD concensus, but all indications point to a level headed and non-extreme POV concerning this. Hamster Sandwich 01:28, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) I'll settle just for Support. feydey 01:42, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 11) Support. Jaxl | talk 03:18, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 12) A fine edit history, earning my Support. --Alan Au 05:07, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 13) Support Proto t c 09:32, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 14) Support I could have sworn you already were. I see you everywhere, doing virtually everything! Acetic  ' Acid  09:49, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 15) Merovingian (t) (c) 12:23, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 16) Duh. Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 14:31, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 17) Support. No question. SlimVirgin (talk) 18:35, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * 18) Support: A sane and energetic editor who will, I think, be a sane and moderate administrator. Geogre 19:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 19) Support. Going by previous interaction I expect he'll treat admin rights carefully and thoughtfully. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:17, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 20) Support Baaaaaa. No good reason not to, breif interaction suggests good reason to.--Tznkai 20:31, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 21) Support.  Ral  315  00:18, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 22) Support, as per the trifecta of SlimVirgin, Geogre, and Mindspillage, (yeah, yeah, and the rest of you people, too). ;-) Func( t, c, @,) 01:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 23) Support.  Jtkiefer  T - 02:41, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 24) Support Evil Monkey∴Hello 09:09, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 25) Strong support. Rob's good judgment will make an excellent admin; every time he's alerted me to a problem user on the #wikipedia IRC channeltime, I wound up agreeing with analysis. Rob has also impressed me with his precise understanding of both the mechanics and the '''purpose' of the RFArb process. I'm a better man because of Rob's intervention, and I look forward to his joining the Mediation Committee in the near future. Uncle Ed 14:58, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 26) Support. All-around good guy. FreplySpang (talk) 23:35, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * 27) Support Per those above. Bratsche talk 17:17, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * 28) Support. Screw editcountitis, Rob is a good user to talk to and every time I seen him around, he is very civil with everyone. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 21:55, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 29) Support. Normally I wouldn't consider 2 months enough, but 1500+ edits wins over that. N (t/c) 16:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 30) Support Por supuesto.  V. Molotov [[Image:Flag of California.svg|25px]]  15:25, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 31) Support, fight editcountitis... er, accountageitis! - ulayiti (talk)   (my RfA)  15:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 32) Support, expect him not to abuse admin powers. 172.162.10.219 19:14, 6 September 2005 (UTC) Sorry, not logged in. Christopher Parham (talk) 19:19, 2005 September 6 (UTC)
 * 33) Support. Has made an very strong impression on me in his short time here. As many of the oppose votes below point out, tt's something of a gamble to support such as relatively new user. With Rob, however, I think it's a very safe bet. Fernando Rizo T/C 01:06, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 34) Support CambridgeBayWeather 02:47, 10 October 2005 (UTC) Somehow ended up on this page instead of the correct one. CambridgeBayWeather 03:06, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Eh, I don't know you very well. --WikiFan04Talk 17:24, 31 Aug 2005 (CDT)
 * ... you are seriously going to start proving a point expertimentally on Requests for adminship? Because that has been done before and nothing good came from it. You were not promoted because you have close to no experience and interaction on the project, that's it. Move on. --Sn0wflake 22:52, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Snowflake please don't bite the newbies :) (I should note that on requests for buerocratship I've seen people oppose for the same reason... so at least its a reason... even if an infuriating one :)) Ryan Norton T 23:00, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Even so, Ryan Norton, I really have to agree with Sn0wflake on this one. It seems as if WikiFan04 has been deliberately voting Oppose just to prove a point, and I dont think that its fair to the candidates. "I don't know you very well?". If you have only managed 700 edits in 19 months, obviously, you cant know anyone because you are not very involved in the project. Oh well, what can you do?  Journalist C./ Holla @ me!
 * WikiFan isn't a newbie. But, this bitterness about not becoming an admin is going to make things worse for him next time around. Andre ( talk ) 23:31, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
 * RN, I don't think said editor fits the usual definition of a newbie, and should have known better, but nevertheless, I merely believe that with this behavior the editor has ensured that he will not be promoted to the status of admin - which seems be of meaning to him - any time soon. --Sn0wflake 23:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Not voting, but I think the Catch 22 aspect is quite amusing. -Splash 00:17, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Slightly oppose. You seem to be a serious and dedicated Wikipedian, but you are also very young here. Your account was registered two months ago but you did less than 75 edits in your first month here, which is really not much and leaves in fact only 1 month of active work to judge your contributions. You do not seem to meet your own standards for adminship yet. Sam Hocevar 13:12, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose.  Rob, I like what I've seen of you, but I don't think that 1 month of active editting and 1 month of occassional editting is enough time to have sampled the full wiki experience and be prepared for adminship.  If this were a couple months later, I expect you would have my full support.  Dragons flight 02:37, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Weak oppose, agree with Dragons flight, too little experience. — J I P  | Talk 15:30, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 5) Oppose. Agree with Dragons flight completely. Jonathunder 15:56, 2005 September 5 (UTC)
 * 6) As above. — Dan | Talk 16:57, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 7) Oppose, I believe I have seen you on occasion and thought good of your work. However,  your first edits were on  the first of July which is a little to soon for me. I believe by November I would support your nom. but an admin IMHO needs more experience. Falphin 23:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Oppose, as above. --Cyberjunkie | Talk 15:52, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 9) Oppose for reasons cited by Dragons flight — Ringbang 19:45, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 10) Oppose, not enough time - yet. --Sn0wflake 03:27, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Neutral
 * 1) Not enough edits or time (only 2 months). BRIAN 0918 • 2005-09-3 04:05
 * 2) Although I agree with most of the other admins who voted support above, I do feel uncomfortable that this user has only been with us since 1 July, with only less than 75 edits in that first month. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Neutral. Not enough experience. Keep up the same pace of editing for a few months and I'll gladly support in the future.  android  79  17:42, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Neutral more time, Derktar 00:04, September 7, 2005 (UTC).

Comments
 * Questions for the candidate are at the top, just below the nomination notice. --Alan Au 23:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I put it back below... someone can revert it back to top if they think it looks better that way :). Ryan Norton T 23:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Hey! Let the candidate organise the page the way he wants, that gives us an impression of what kind of person he is too, doesn't it? :-) Kim Bruning 23:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I did explain why I'd done this, when I did it (see (currently) bottom question), but if people object, that's fine. I just think it's unusual to vote for someone without understanding them first. Rob Church Talk 23:35, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't care.... I just put it this way becuase that's the way the others were... feel free to change it back :) Ryan Norton T 03:17, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yet another apparently excellent candidate that I would like to watch for a couple more months before forming an opinion. --Tony Sidaway Talk 03:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * edit count Ryan Norton T 03:15, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Regarding the edits in July, all I can assume is that I must've created the account earlier than I remembered. My real wiki-ing started in August, and I don't remember doing a lot in July; unless the account was created at the end of that month? Rob Church Talk 20:24, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Questions for the candidate

A few generic questions to provide guidance for voters:

 * What sysop chores, if any, would you anticipate helping with?
 * I already do a lot of recent changes patrol, particularly, monitoring of new pages. A rollback link would be useful for reverting simple vandalism, and blocking persistent vandals would also be a help. I would also patrol WP:AIV, as I know what it's like to be a regular user fighting persistent and mindless vandalism. I do participate in the messy process that is VfD, and would like to be able to help clean up backlogs and close old debates. I have a reasonable grasp of copyright laws, and would also be able to clean up after articles with those issues, once the time period is up.

 * Of your articles or contributions to Wikipedia, are there any about which you are particularly pleased, and why?
 * I suppose the first contribution I really noticed as being unusual was Federal Firearms License. I spotted what appeared to be a copyvio'd stub whilst on new page patrol. Unable to find the copyvio, I cleaned up and expanded the article. Other contributions I'm pleased with are Wyatt Eaton and Nedrick Young, for similar reasons.

 * Have you been in any conflicts over editing in the past or do you feel other users have caused you stress? How have you dealt with it and how will you deal with it in the future?
 * I avoid edit conflicts like the plague; if someone makes a revert I don't agree with, I start a discussion on the article's talk page, usually proposing compromises and then drop a link to it on their talk page. I revert bad faith edits once, and then leave the article as-is, only adding or correcting content. In the interests of full disclosure, I was originally one of the initiating parties in the Ed Poor ArbCom case. I am pleased to say that, through informal mediation, we were able to reach an agreeable settlement, and were able to withdraw the case. Insofar as I can gather, Ed bears me no ill will, and we all learned some lessons during that process.

''Questions I (the nominee) expect will be asked, and would like to answer now:

 * Why did you move the questions above the votes and refactor the page?
 * I prefer to be transparent and open about things, and I'd rather people based their votes on their impression of me overall, coupled with the impression derived from my answers. I think it's madness to vote before you see someone's opinions and planned implementations.

 * What do you consider consensus to be?
 * Consensus is an interesting thing, sometimes difficult to determine; it's certainly not a straightforward majority vote. In looking to determine consensus, I'd look for a 75% or higher general trend towards an idea, but also consider the bigger picture. All opinions must be taken into consideration if a decision is to accurately represent the wishes of the community. I appreciate that in being promoted to admin, I'd be labelled as a trusted member of the Wikipedia community, and would respect that trust. If in doubt, I'd seek advice from a more experienced admin, bureaucrat, etc.