text:
Talk:Megabit

More meaningful byte value conversion
I just added a more meaningful byte value conversion, as that's something people would likely be looking for....

Someone's got a Mbit down as 10^6 (correct) = 1,048,... (whatever, but it's wrong) bits. The M in megabit is the decimal mega (10^6). Which does not - no matter your binary conventions, equal anything other than one million. Have removed this spurious figure.

 * Thanks. It's hard to maintain all these articles against vandalism. — Omegatron 03:51, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Untrue statement
The megabit is most commonly used when referring to data transfer rates in network speeds, e.g. a 100 Mbit/s Fast Ethernet connection. In this context, like elsewhere in telecommunications, it always equals 106 bits. Residential high speed internet is often measured in megabits.

A binary counterpart of megabit, useful for measuring RAM and ROM chip capacity, is mebibit.

^^ The above is untrue in terms of telecommunications although without checking holds true for packet based networks.

With the developement of PCM a 4kHz voice was sampled at 8000 times per second and formed 8 bit words (7bit data plus parity). Hence 8000x8 = 64Kb/s (Should be 64Kib/s)

Further as defined by SDH/SONET standards the primary rate interface E1 (Europe) is 2.048Mb/s (2.048Mib/s) That is 32 x 64Kb/s channels are thus byte interleaved to form a 2.048Mb/s (2.048Mib/s). Thus the new terminology defined by the IEC 60027-2 Standard (or working group) is factually correct.

Storage medium for the most part (Hard Drives Predominantly) continue to use the metric conversion.

The use of k or K does not in itself imply binary nor metric hence the move to use IEC 60027-2 Standard for data transmission and solid state memory devices is an important step.

125 KB?
are you sure it is not 122KB because 125 000 bits devided by 1024 is 122.0703125 and Kilobytes are 1024 based not 1000 based

I just made the change because you're right - KevinJones 20:33, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I just changed it to 122KB again... who keeps changing it? --Poh Tay Toez (talk) 03:18, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

 * The kilobyte is an ambiguous unit. It's pointless switching between 122 kilobytes and 125 kilobytes because both are correct. In fact even the megabit is ambiguous (some define it as 1024^2 bits), which makes for yet more options. Let's keep it as simple as possible without losing the essence. Thunderbird2 (talk) 10:39, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Removed some trivia
I removed the following as non-encyclopedic:

"It is certain that the SNES Street Fighter II cartridge's proud claim that it came on a 'massive 16-Mbit cartridge' sounds more impressive than stating that the whole game weighed in at 2 MB, i.e. about the same size as a desktop-sized bitmap image these days."

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaleja (talk • contribs) 22:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Megabit
(Cross-posted from User talk:intgr)

Actually, SNES cartridge capacities are measured in mebibits, you are right, but the symbol of mebibit is Mibit, not Mbit like it's written in Megabit. Sarenne 21:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Indeed, I missed that. -- intgr 22:19, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

 * What do you suggest we do about it? Perhaps the cartridge example is bad for this article in the first place? -- intgr 22:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I simply suggest to replace "Mbit" by "Mibit", like in Mebibit but it will need explanation about the fact that 'megabits' are actually 'mebibits'. Perhaps this example is not relevant for this article, you're right :) Sarenne 22:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

neutrality question
This statement seems to imply mild contempt for standard industry usage: "The practice of using megabit or Mbit in this context is still widespread in the RAM and ROM manufacturing industry in 2007 #despite the availability of an unambiguous alternative#." The portion in hash marks seems based in opinion. To me, IMHO, the author of this statement is indicating the opinion that RAM/ROM manufacturer's should change their usage. Akamos (talk) 17:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure that the quoted statement is even true. When people refer to RAM and ROM it is usually in terms of bytes, not bits.  If a source is found demonstrating its correctness (that the megabit is used in the binary sense), I consider it reasonable to point out that an unambiguous unit is available. Do you have a suggestion for rephrasing it in a more neutral way? Thunderbird2 (talk) 17:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

 * That passage arose due to binary prefix evangelism. I've pared it down to what's necessary to direct people to the mebibit article.  -- Dachannien TalkContrib 18:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It is true, though, that all the manufacturers I can think of, including Samsung, Toshiba, TI, Atmel, etc, all use the terms kilobit (Kbit/Kb), megabit (Mbit/Mb), and gigabit (Gbit/Gb) in the base-two sense of the word, when referring to discrete SRAM, DRAM, EEPROM, and Flash chips. They do *not* refer to these chips in terms of their "byte" storage capacity (I hypothesize here) because of the historical ambiguity of the very term "byte", which has had different meanings from 5 bits up to 9 bits or more through various historical generations of computer architectures.  JEDEC standards support this view as well.  I was the person who most recently expanded on the recently deleted section; when I wrote it I actually surprised myself with how fair and balanced I thought I was being.  I am personally in favour of "unit purity" and would like nothing more than to see the day when the misuse of "megabit" and the likes are forgotten to history; however, that day has not yet come, and I thought it was important for people who are researching the issue be presented with factually accurate facts about the current state of affairs within the industry. Goosnarrggh (talk) 13:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I absolutely agree, a MB and Mb is not, has not, and will not be Decimal. Just because the industry makes up standards to justify their market schemes does not make it true. In addition there is no mention that Microsoft's OS uses the binary system. This document is absolutely biased http://macosx.com/forums/apple-news-rumors-discussion/36506-computer-makers-sued-over-hard-drive-size-claims.html

"Market schemes" or even deceit do not account for the difference in definition. It is simply easier to communicate that a memory chip is "1 Megabit" when it has a capacity of 1024×1024 bits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:8BE:3CCD:7CDC:6737:4A07:6ABC (talk) 01:13, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

There are allot of documents like this. Overnight the standard changed.--74.67.130.59 (talk) 19:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Use of "mega" in the computer industry
In the computer industry, a mega-something is _always_ 2^20 of them. (kilo is 2^10.) The term was coined long ago in order to avoid the nasty-looking decimal equivalents of powers-of-2 numbers that are necessary to use in optimal digital system design. If you mean a million bytes, you should say a million bytes. If you say a megabyte, expect any digital designer to understand you're trying to make a distinction, that you're really talking about 1,048,576 bytes, not 1,000,000 bytes, but didn't want to write it out, or force the reader to recognize that number as a clean power of 2. I'm always a big fan of revisionist history, but please understand the confusion you perpetuate by attempting to co-opt the terms kilobit/byte, megabit/byte, and so forth to mean powers of 10. If you'd like to coin a new term like mebibibbibibit/byte, I recommend to apply the new term to the powers of 10, as there is a large established industry which understands exactly what a "megabyte" is. Or just use the words we already have: million, billion, trillion, and so forth. Best Regards, Ron. 70.102.112.242 (talk) 17:58, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * For the purposes of this particular article, there are legitimate circumstances where different segments of the industry have standardized on opposite interpretations. It is therefore appropriate to identify these differences of opinion.  The example is given of "megabits per second", for which the interpretation "millions of bits per second" is consistently accepted.  It would, in fact, be an example of revisionist history to change its meaning to "2^20s of bits per second" today.Goosnarrggh (talk) 13:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
 * IEEE 802.3 (the governing spec for "100 Mbit/s (megabit per second) Fast Ethernet connection" as cited in the article page, does not generally use the term "megabit" to define its data rate. Instead, it uses the word "million" when referring to bits per second.  (In the version I'm looking at, IEEE 802.3-2002, the term "megabit" appears only twice, whereas "million" in the context of bits or bit-groups appears 14 times, including in the all-important definition of bit rate.)  I don't think "Fast Ethernet" is a good example to support your point -- nor do I think the current article accurately reflects the statement that there are differences of opinion.  Rather, it seems written from the point of view of a "deci-vangelist", to paraphrase a previous talk point, and attempts to pass off a new term as if it were in widespread use.  If the goal of the page is to provide unbiased representation of the actual use of the word "megabit", then it (currently) fails to meet that goal.  Best Regards, Ron. 70.102.112.242 (talk) 23:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Although most people involved in digital industries use "mega" to mean 2^20, this is incorrect. SI define mega as 10^6. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.176.173 (talk)
 * Why do you consider the SI to be correct, when it is not the accepted standard for measurement for memory size?

12:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC) I kinda opened this discussion up, and Im happy to see the interest it has generated. The result of this discussion is clearly that the term "Megabit" has multiple meanings for multiple applications and has different values regarding who or what you are talking about. What must be given within the document is CONTEXT. Without Context the article is misleading and wrong. It is incomplete to point out a single definition, and must be more broadly described. The assumption that a Megabit is 1,000,000 bytes is false for in many situations and in common language, many indidviduals (including Myself) refer to a megabit as 1,048,576. People like me are no more incorrect or correct as thoose that use 1,000,000 bytes. Now maybe as time passes this will change to the Mb and Mibit standad, but until such a change is made and until such a change is accepted by the industry as a hole it is incorrect to have a singular definition.--74.67.130.59 (talk) 05:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

This article contains questionable information (e.g. expressing the size of old software in terms of kilobits or megabits instead of kilobytes or megabytes) because I think some persons have confused the concepts of a byte and a bit. Program sizes were normally referred to in terms of bytes, and thus KB and MB, not bits. During the whole 8-bit microprocessor period, I feel it was well-understood what a byte was--one character, which was denoted by combinations of 8 bits (each bit is a binary characteristic of either being on or off--a 1 or a 0). This began to get confusing in the 16-bit generation of microprocessors, so I have to agree with the claim that it is a "revisionist" effort to try to clarify these things by expressing them in terms of bits rather than bytes (i.e. Does a 16-bit processor have bytes that are twice as large as they were during the 8-bit era?) During the 8-bit era, there was little ambiguity among users and programmers. A byte was 8 bits, which in binary provided a value from 0 to 255 for the memory location (byte) being addressed, or the value loaded into the microprocessor's accumulator, to be interpreted as a single number. The only time I ever heard "bits" being used to describe large scale data sizes (rather than the wiring of the microprocessor) was when modem data transfer was involved. For example, a modem of the time might send information over phone lines at a rate of 120 bps (notice that the b is not capitalized, and referred to bits per second, which no knowledgeable person at the time would ever have confused with a term like 4KB of RAM). Bits could also have been used to refer to other I/O operations, but again, the rate of data transfer was usually expressed as such (e.g. bps) and involved much smaller numbers than those involved with RAM and ROM (e.g. no metric prefix was usually needed: 120 bps vs. 64K RAM vs. 1MB total program size, like for a 4-disc software package). 136.181.195.29 (talk) 15:57, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

telecommunications mibi/mega
I'd like to see this statement addressed:

'Telecommunications always uses the correct SI definition of the unit.'

Can we please remove 'correct'. It doesn't add anything to the meaning of the sentence and it seems kinda condescending to the 1k = 1024 people.

Also, can someone site a reference for this? i.e. Can someone look up some example telecommunications standards (Like ethernet, telephone PRIs, etc.) which explicitly state the megabit = 100000000bit in accordance with wikipedia's rule for citing sources of information.

209.239.13.226 (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

N64
"This usage continued on the Nintendo 64, with cartridge sizes ranging between 32 and 512 megabits."

Is there a source for this? I've never seen N64 game sizes referred to as anything other than MiB/mebibytes. Further, the 32-512 figure is only accurate for Mib/mebibits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Telanis (talk • contribs) 17:13, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Megabit's Symbol: Mb or Mbit or Both?
All the other wiki entries for base 10 bit-units have two letter abbreviations. Isn't Mb also a proper symbol for megabit? Look at the other base 10 bit-unit's symbols, with links to their respective wikipedia articles here: [Symbols of Units Found on Wikipedia http://www.lonniebest.com/DataUnitConverter/] Should Mb be added as a symbol for Megabit in this article?

 * @anonymous editor, you are quite correct. The symbols Mb is also used for megabit, and I agreeit would be helpful to include this information in the article. The same applies to kb for kilobit, Gb for gigabit, and so on, so perhaps these other articles need updating too. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 16:44, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Megabit


text:
SBRI

SBRI may refer to the

 * Center for Global Infectious Disease Research, formerly known as Seattle Biomedical Research Institute
 * Small Business Research Initiative in the United Kingdom

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

title: SBRI


text:
Talk:Polyol

Untitled
It looks as if someone stole this page from somewhere, but a web search hasn't brought up anything...

 * Applications was a copy so I took it out --Henrygb 17:59, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Polyols looks to me like a copy of http://www.spipolyols.com/whatarepolyols.html while Polyols looks like a copy of http://www.spipolyols.com/applications.html - sadly User:V8rik disagrees with me. --Henrygb 00:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

This is clearly plagiarized material. The use of the word "successfully" under the Applications section is a dead non-NPOV give-away. Henrygb is correct, this page is plagiarized almost entirely word for word. How one claims that a verbatim copy has been rewritten is beyond me. --Oasisbob 10:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

The original entry was an exact copy. The original website was not difficult to track down. Now there are two options 1. deletion outright 2. modify the text trim it down and make it acceptable under fair use with citing the website as a reference. Option 1 is okay but option 2 was chosen (see history). Now Henrygb still sees plagiarism in the text and has two options: 1. delete it the entire text and let the first effort (trimming down, rewording & provide links) go to waste 2. trim it down even further so that now even Henrygb is content with it. This user choose option 1 which I oppose because the initial effort made is not appreciated and potential Wiki material destroyed. V8rik 17:53, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
 * You cannot destroy wikipedia material which is not yours to begin with. It's hard to appreciate an action which is was blatent copyright infringement. Reviewing the history shows that the original page really wasn't rewritten, a few added wiki links and a few slightly revised phrases are the extent of the editing. Besides, adding original content doesn't depend on a "Take text and modify it until it is not recognized" type model. Copyright_problems makes it very clear that blatent plagarism like this can be easily remedied by reverting the page to a pre-infringement state. If you would like to write your own additions for this article based on the source material which you research, go ahead. However, based on policy this page should be entirely deleted becuase it was never based on original content. --Oasisbob 05:38, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * My preference would be to delete the page and then insert a redirect to sugar alcohol --Henrygb 10:04, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * excellent suggestion, except that a small bottom part of this article concerns polymer polyols, so I would suggest a disambiguation page with link to sugar alcohols but keep the polymer chemistry part.  V8rik 17:08, 18 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Excellent. We agree. I'm going to spend some time on this page when I get a chance. --Oasisbob 05:09, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging
This article talk page was automatically added with WikiProject Food and drink banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here. Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories, but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns, please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Multiple issues
The lead sentence A polyol is an alcohol containing multiple hydroxyl groups. is correct.

Issues:
 * The article makes no distinction between polymeric compounds containing terminal hydroxyl groups (polyether polyols) and (polyester polyols) and polymeric compounds containing multiple hydroxyl groups
 * "Polymeric polyols are generally used to produce other polymers" - too specific - uses include additives etc
 * "Polymeric polyols are usually polyethers or polyesters" - too specific, PVA etc are not mentioned
 * potentially misleading by exclusion

The article makes no mention of Polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) which is unambiguously a polyol — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xiiophen (talk • contribs) 07:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Though the references given do describe the compounds as "polyols" this is not the basis for generalization.

 * I corrected some of the issues you listed. Minihaa (talk) 13:22, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

The definition is internally inconsistent. It currently states:-

A polyol is an organic compound containing multiple hydroxyl groups. The term "polyol" can have slightly different meanings depending on whether it is being used in the field of food science or that of polymer chemistry. A molecule with more than two hydroxyl groups is a polyol, with three – a triol, and with four – a tetrol. By convention, polyols do not refer to compounds that contain other functional groups.

Two is multiple - hence consistent with the first sentence - but the third sentence excludes materials with only two hydroxyl groups. This is unfortunate as the text uses diols, polyether polyols, and polyester poyols as examples of polyols, each of which have only two hydroxyl groups.

Suggested change for second sentence "A molecule with two or more hydroxyl groups is a polyol, with two - a diol, with three – a triol, and with four – a tetrol."

See for example JimBoff (talk) 11:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Polyol


text:
Talk:4B3T

A non-vio version is available on the temp page. — Lomn | Talk 06:41:52, 2005-08-19 (UTC)

Original 4b3t code
The one documented is the ISDN variant, which has a lower DC disparity bound of ±1.5. The original one allowed the DC to get to ±3:

71.41.210.146 (talk) 13:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:4B3T


text:
Talk:Macedonia (Roman province)

Untitled
Okay, I don't know (or don't remember, having read it before) when the province of Macedonia was divided into Macedonia Prima and Macedonia Salutaris. Internet sources say anywhere from the 3rd Century AD, the Fourth Century AD, or the Fifth Century AD. And Macedonia Salutaris seems to have been reorganized and renamed Macedonia Secunda at some (later) point. ---Alexander 007 11:44, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Some anonymous users are vandalizing the page for political reasons. The vandalism is focused on Andriscus of Macedon's ancient identity: The original phrase: "... defeated Andriscus of Macedon, the last greek King of Macedon ..." sometimes is vandalized by people of FYROM and changes into the following phrase"... defeated Andriscus of Macedon, the last Macedonian King of Macedon ...". The fact is that the original phrase is neutral and already describes him as a Macedonian (phrase: Andriscus of Macedon, King of Macedonians), while the vandalized version uses the word "Macedonian" 3 times repeately (Andriscus of Macedon, Macedonian King of Macedon), is a tactic with hidden political aspects (by giving him modern ethnic-Macedonian identity). Historically, the modern day Ethnic-Macedonian (Slav Macedonian) identity is absolutely separated and different than the identity of the ancient Macedonians, who where a Greek tribe, like ancient Spartans, ancient Epirots, ancient Corinthians, ancient Athenians, ancient Laecedemonians, etc.

Early geography of the Roman province of Macedonia
I would like to know where in the sources it is stated that Moesia, Dardania and Pannonia early on were part of the province of Macedonia as is stated by this article Aeolic order (talk) 17:47, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As the article's in-text references indicate, you can read about this at length in and . They collect the (large) number of literary and epigraphic references. Furius (talk) 19:35, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

You just copy-pasted these from the bibliography of the entire article. I want references to the exact thing I am asking. Aeolic order (talk) 21:40, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Yeah, and I want this page gone because it dismisses my lineage and the current fact that ITS ITS OWN DAMN COUNTRY NOW. Jesus you people are something else. 2601:406:8400:1EA0:49F5:E8DA:3B9D:4725 (talk) 21:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Macedonia (Roman province)


text:
Byzantinism

Byzantinism, or Byzantism, is the political system and culture of the Byzantine Empire, and its spiritual successors the Orthodox Christian Balkan countries of Greece and Bulgaria especially, and to a lesser extent Serbia and some other Orthodox countries in Eastern Europe like Belarus, Georgia, Russia and Ukraine. The term Byzantinism itself was coined in the 19th century. The term has primarily negative associations, implying complexity and autocracy.

This negative reputation stressed the confusing complexities of the Empire's ministries and the elaborateness of its court ceremonies. Likewise, the "Byzantine system" also suggests a penchant for intrigue, plots and assassinations and an overall unstable political state of affairs. The term has been criticized by modern scholars for being a generalization that is not very representative of the reality of the Byzantine aristocracy and bureaucracy.

Aristocracy and bureaucracy
The Byzantine Empire is a modern term applied by Westerners to the Eastern Roman Empire (that survived a thousand years after the western one collapsed in 476) and thus had a complex system of aristocracy and bureaucracy which was derived from earlier Roman systems. At the apex of the pyramid stood the Emperor, sole ruler and divinely ordained, and beneath him a multitude of officials and court functionaries operated the administrative machinery of the state. A key component of state power was the prestige of the imperial institution and its long antiquity. Ceremony and the granting of both honorific titles and valuable offices was therefore extensive and elaborate.

Over the nearly fifteen hundred years of the empire's existence, different titles were adopted and discarded, and many lost or gained prestige. By the time of Heraclius in the 7th century many of the early Roman titles, grounded in the Latin language and the traditions of the old Roman Republic had become obsolete in the now mostly Greek-speaking empire, although Latin survived longer in law and in the military. Heraclius formally changed the official language to Greek from Latin in 610. Titles inspired by their Greek tradition, often only rough approximation of Latin concepts, became common (i.e. "basileus" [βασιλεύς] instead of "caesar" or "augustus" for the title of the emperor himself). Other titles changed meaning (for example, "Patriarch") or were devalued with time (such as "consul").

Among important qualities of the Empire was also the caesaropapism, the subjugation of church to the state.

Byzantinism in Germany
According to the Polish historian Feliks Koneczny, German culture is deeply rooted in Byzantinism, a phenomenon he calls German Byzantinism (Bizantynizm niemiecki). It started with the formation of the Holy Roman Empire and the adaptation of Byzantine theories concerning political rule to German lands by Otto I and subsequent Holy Roman Emperors.

Criticism
The Byzantine Empire acquired a negative reputation in the Western world as early as the Middle Ages. The creation of the Holy Roman Empire by Charlemagne in the 9th century and the East–West Schism in the 11th century made the Empire an outcast to the Western European countries following the Roman Church, and the siege and sack of Constantinopole during the Fourth Crusade in 1204 only cemented those differences. Hence the European medieval stereotypes of the people of the Byzantine Empire portrayed them as perfidious, treacherous, servile, effeminate and unwarlike.

Medievalist Steven Runciman described the medieval European view of the Byzantine Empire by saying: "Ever since our rough crusading forefathers first saw Constantinople and met, to their contemptuous disgust, a society where everyone read and wrote, ate food with forks and preferred diplomacy to war, it has been fashionable to pass the Byzantines by with scorn and to use their name as synonymous with decadence."

Criticism of the Empire continued among historians of the 18th century and 19th century, particularly in the works of historians and philosophers influenced by The Enlightenment. Edward Gibbon, Hegel, Johann Gottfried Herder, William Lecky, Montesquieu, and Voltaire were among the many Western writers of that period who were critical of the Byzantine system.

"Of that Byzantine empire, the universal verdict of history is that it constitutes, without a single exception, the most thoroughly base and despicable form that civilization has yet assumed. There has been no other enduring civilization so absolutely destitute of all forms and elements of greatness, and none to which the epithet 'mean' may be so emphatically applied ... The history of the empire is a monotonous story of the intrigues of priests, eunuchs, and women, of poisonings, of conspiracies, of uniform ingratitude."

"Its [Byzantium's] general aspect presents a disgusting picture of imbecility: wretched, nay, insane passions, stifles the growth of all that is noble in thoughts, deeds, and persons. Rebellion on the part of generals, depositions of the Emperors by means or through the intrigues of the courtiers, assassinations or poisoning of the Emperors by their own wives and sons, women surrendering themselves to lusts and abominations of all kinds."

Edward Gibbon, the first English historian to write a full history of the Byzantine Empire in his The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776–1789), was a sharp critic of the Empire. Jacob Burckhardt, an influential 19th-century historian shared Gibbon's view:

"At its summit was despotism, infinitely strengthened by the union of churchly and secular dominion; in the place of morality it imposed orthodoxy; in the place of unbridled and demoralized expression of the natural instincts, hypocrisy and pretense; in the face of despotism there was developed greed masquerading as poverty, and deep cunning; in religious art and literature there was an incredible stubbornness in the constant repetition of obsolete motifs."

Critics pointed out that the Byzantine Empire and its successors were uninfluenced by such major shifts in Western philosophy as the Investiture Controversy, the Reformation and the Renaissance; and reduced the Byzantine political culture to caesaropapism and authoritarian political culture, described as authoritarian, despotic, and imperialistic.

After the fall of the Byzantine Empire, critics of the Byzantine system pointed out that it has survived and "corrupted" other states, in particular, it has been used in the discourse of the political system, culture and society of Russia (from the times of the Grand Duchy of Moscow through the tsardom of Russia to the Russian Empire – see also tsarist autocracy), the Soviet Union, the Ottoman Empire and the Balkan states (the former European provinces of the Ottoman Empire).

Modern historians point out that this negative reputation is not necessarily true, and at the very least, a very simplistic generalization. As a constructed term, Byzantinism also shares those fallacies with a closely related term, Balkanism. Angelov sums it up as follows:

"Byzantinism begins from simple stereotypes, passes through reductionism and essentialization, and then proceeds to impute Byzantium's supposed essence onto modern Balkans or Russia as the burden of history. ... As a discourse of 'otherness', Byzantinism evolves from, and reflects upon, the West's worst dreams and nightmares about its own self."

Praise
While the Byzantine Empire was commonly seen in a negative fashion, there were exceptions. Byzantium was rehabilitated in France during the Age of Absolutism, from the 17th century to the French Revolution, in the works of such individuals as the Jesuit Pierre Poussines.

As the Enlightenment swept Western Europe, French traditions found refuge in the Russian Empire. The term Byzantinism was used in a positive context by 19th-century Russian scholar Konstantin Leontiev in Byzantism and Slavdom (1875) to describe the type of society which the Russian Empire needed to counter the "degenerating influence" of the West. Leontiev praised the Byzantine Empire and the tsarist autocracy, and a society and political system that comprises authoritative power of the monarch, devout following of the Russian Orthodox Church, the maintenance of obshchina for peasants, and sharp class division; he also criticized universal education and democracy.

"When we mentally picture Byzantinism we see before us as if... the austere, clear plan of a spacious and capacious structure. We know, for example, that in politics it means autocracy. In religion, it means Christianity with distinct features, which distinguish it from Western churches, from heresies and schisms. In the area of ethics we know that the Byzantine ideal does not have that elevated and in many instances highly exaggerated notion of terrestrial human individual introduced into history by German feudalism. We know the inclination of the Byzantine ethical ideal to be disappointed in all that is of this world, in happiness, in the constancy of our own purity, in our capacity here, below, to attain complete moral perfection. We know that Byzantinism (as Christianity in general) rejects all hope of the universal well-being of nations; it is the strongest antithesis of the idea of well-being of nations; it is the strongest antithesis of the idea of humanity in the sense of universal worldly equality, universal worldly freedom, universal worldly perfectibility, and universal contentment."

In Russian political discourse, Russia is sometimes affectionately called Third Rome, the second Rome being the Eastern Roman Empire, which outlived its western counterpart at Rome itself, the first Rome, by a thousand years.

In his article, "Was There Ever Byzantinism?" Alexander Mirkovic argued that many Western authors have created an imagined picture of Byzantium as a projection of their own anxieties.

Some scholars focused on the positive aspects of Byzantine culture and legacy, French historian Charles Diehl described the Byzantine Empire by saying: "Byzantium created a brilliant culture, may be, the most brilliant during the whole Middle Ages, doubtlessly the only one existing in Christian Europe before the XI century. For many years, Constantinople remained the sole grand city of Christian Europe ranking second to none in splendour. Byzantium literature and art exerted a significant impact on peoples around it. The monuments and majestic works of art, remaining after it, show us the whole lustre of byzantine culture. That's why Byzantium held a significant place in the history of Middle Ages and, one must admit it, a merited one."

Historian Averil Cameron regards as undeniable the Byzantine contribution to the formation of medieval Europe, and both Cameron and Dimitri Obolensky recognise the major role of Byzantium in shaping Orthodoxy, which in turn occupies a central position in the history, societies and culture of Greece, Romania, Bulgaria, Russia, Georgia, Serbia and other countries. The Byzantines also preserved and copied classical manuscripts, and they are thus regarded as transmitters of classical knowledge, as important contributors to modern European civilisation, and as precursors of both Renaissance humanism and Slavic-Orthodox culture.

Modern discourse
In a modern context it can be used to denote undemocratic practices and the use of violence in political life; it has been often used in the context of South-Eastern European (Balkan) politics. The "baggage" of Byzantine tradition is used to explain the delays in developing democratic institutions, the preference for the strong, even autocratic governments, people's distrust of businessmen and elected politicians, and overall, to explain the difference between the West and South-East and Eastern Europe. The word "Byzantinism" and related, like "Byzantine", have acquired negative connotations in several West European languages, including the English language.

title: Byzantinism


text:
The Longest Cocktail Party

The Longest Cocktail Party is a book by Richard DiLello, published in 1972 by Playboy Press in the US and Canada and Charisma in the UK, and reprinted in 1981, 1983 (Pierian Press), 1997 (Popular Culture Ink) and 2005. The Longest Cocktail Party is one man's account of the history of the Beatles' company Apple Corps, the break-up of the Beatles, and the beginning of their solo careers.

Background
The title is a reference to the press office's habit of entertaining members of the media, and the company's potential business partners, with expensive drinks, luncheons and perks – which ultimately led to a financial and spiritual hangover, as did the unrealised potential of the company.

DiLello served as the "house hippie" (formally termed Client Liaison Officer; a sort of in-house youth consultant and gofer) at Apple's Savile Row headquarters, from 1968 until 1970, becoming one-on-one acquainted with each of the Beatles, many of their wives and girlfriends, and also the inner circle of agents, managers, and others who worked for and with Apple. These included business manager Allen Klein, lawyers Lee Eastman and John Eastman, road managers (and Apple directors) Mal Evans and Neil Aspinall, press agent and author Derek Taylor, members of Apple bands Badfinger and White Trash, the staff, and the countless visitors to the office.

Content
DiLello covers events including the launching parties for Apple Records and artists like White Trash and Mary Hopkin, the ill-fated Apple Christmas party in 1968 (with two Hells Angels as guests), the Beatles' rooftop concert appearing in Let It Be, the lawsuits that began as the Beatles grew apart, and finally the closing of the Apple press office.

The several appendices to the book include the full text of the self-penned "interview" issued by Paul McCartney with the pre-release copies of his first solo album (McCartney), that effectively announced the band's breakup in April 1970; a discography of Apple Records releases; a list of the Beatles' achievements as recording artists; and text of several British news articles about Apple.

Aftermath and legacy
In addition to shooting the cover portrait of Badfinger for their Straight Up album, DiLello also went on to write the screenplay for the 1983 Sean Penn film, Bad Boys; as well as the story for the 1988 Dennis Hopper film, Colors.

On 7 May 2010, it was confirmed that the book is to be made into a feature film. It is currently in development by Liam Gallagher's In 1 Productions.

In 2015, the book was re-released by Alfred Music. This officially authorized edition features a new foreword written by DiLello.

title: The Longest Cocktail Party


text:
Imperial Group plc v Philip Morris Ltd

Imperial Group plc v Philip Morris Ltd, 1982 FSR 72, was a case of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales. The plaintiff endeavoured to register the trade mark "MERIT" for cigarette products, but was unable to do so on the grounds that the trade mark was too descriptive. Instead, it registered the mark "NERIT", without any intention of using the mark, but in order to prevent other traders from using the mark "MERIT" because it would be considered too similar to the registered mark "NERIT". The intention was to obtain a de facto monopoly over the unregisterable mark "MERIT".

The defendant began using the mark "MERIT" for cigarettes and was sued by the plaintiff for infringing its mark "NERIT".

The court struck down the registration for "NERIT" on the basis that the plaintiff had no genuine intention to use the mark (despite some "trivial and insubstantial" efforts at launching a NERIT-branded product).

title: Imperial Group plc v Philip Morris Ltd


text:
Irina Nikulchina

Irina Nikulchina (Ирина Никулчина) (born 8 December 1974 in Razlog) is a Bulgarian biathlete.

At the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City she won a bronze medal in the 10 km pursuit competition. She also competed in the cross-country skiing events in 1994 and 1998, and the biathlon at the 2006 Winter Olympics.

title: Irina Nikulchina


text: Category:Biathletes

title: Category:Biathletes


text:
Ziwiye hoard

The Ziwiye hoard is a treasure hoard containing gold, silver, and ivory objects, also including a few gold pieces with the shape of human face, that was uncovered on in Ziwiyeh plat near Saqqez city in Kurdistan Province, Iran, in 1947.

Provenance
Objects from the hoard provide a link between the cultures of the Iranian plateau and the nomadic or Scythian art forms known as the "animal style". "The Scythian motifs adopted by Urartu account for the decoration of the great Treasure of Saqqez brought to light on the south shore of Lake Urmia," was Leonard Woolley's assessment (Woolley 1961 p 176).

Style
The hoard contains objects in four styles: Assyrian, Scythian, proto-Achaemenid, and the provincial native pieces. Dated ca. 700 BC, this collection of objects illustrates the situation of the Iranian plateau as a crossroads of cultural highways—not least of them the Silk Road—which fused disparate cultures to inform early Iranian art. The objects have also been related to finds at Teppe Hasanlu and Marlyk.

Current location
Examples of the Ziwiye Treasure are scattered among public and private collections. A 'Ziwiye' provenance may have been applied to comparable objects that have passed through the trade since the 1960s. Items attributed to the hoard are currently in the collections of the Metropolitan Museum in New York, the Louvre in Paris and the British Museum in London.

Controversy
The archaeologist Oscar White Muscarella has questioned the whole account of the finding of the hoard (as he has done with the older Oxus Treasure), pointing out that none of the items were excavated under archaeological conditions, but passed through the hands of dealers. He concludes that "there are no objective sources of information that any of the attributed objects actually were found at Ziwiye, although it is probable that some were", and that the objects have no historical and archaeological value as a group", although many are genuine and "exquisite works of art". In a later work Muscarella denounced several "Ziwiye" objects as modern forgeries.

title: Ziwiye hoard


text:
Gilly Coman

Gilly Coman (13 September 1955 – 13 July 2010) was an English actress, who played Aveline in the first four series of Carla Lane's sitcom Bread.

Life and career
Coman appeared in Scully, Coronation Street, Brookside, A Touch of Frost, Springhill, Emmerdale Farm, the BBC sitcom Open All Hours and Inspector Morse in which she played Holly Trevors in the episode "The Day Of The Devil."

Coman also played Marigold Lockton in The Man Who Made Husbands Jealous (1997), the TV adaptation of the Jilly Cooper novel.

Gilly Coman died of a suspected heart attack on 13 July 2010, at the age of 54. She had a heart condition and died just two weeks before she was scheduled for a pacemaker operation.

title: Gilly Coman


text:
User:ShawnSwaner

I am an addicted to random wandering through Wikipedia. I created an account because I have seen a few edits I would like to make and a few topics I would like to add.

I work in software development and enjoy travelling. My most recent trip was to India.

title: User:ShawnSwaner


text:
Talk:St Catherine's School, Twickenham

Untitled
This article has been kept following this VFD debate. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:53, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:St Catherine's School, Twickenham


text:
CBR (AM)

CBR is a Canadian non-commercial public radio station in Calgary, Alberta. It broadcasts the programming of the CBC Radio One network, both on 1010 kHz on the AM dial (as a Class A clear-channel station) and 99.1 MHz on the FM dial as CBR-FM-1. The studios are in the Parkdale neighbourhood of northwest Calgary.

The AM transmitter is east of Calgary, off the Trans-Canada Highway in Rocky View. The FM transmitter is off Old Banff Coach Road near 85th Street SW in Calgary.

The CBR 1010 AM daytime signal covers most of the southern two-thirds of Alberta. It can be heard at city-grade strength from Red Deer to Lethbridge, and provides secondary coverage as far as Edmonton to the north and several counties on the Montana-Alberta border to the south. At night, it covers most of western North America. CBR-FM-1 has an effective radiated power (ERP) of 1,870 watts (7,000 watts maximum). It covers Calgary and its adjacent suburbs.

CBX
CBC Radio launched its first government-owned station in Alberta, signing on the air on. It broadcast on 1010 kilocycles with the call sign CBX. Its studios were in Edmonton and its transmitter site was near Lacombe, roughly halfway between Calgary and Edmonton, in an attempt to serve both cities from a single 50,000-watt transmitter.

Prior to CBX's debut, private station CFAC had aired CBC Radio programming. While listeners in Edmonton received a good signal from 1010 AM, reception of CBX in Calgary was poor.

CBR
To rectify CBX's weak signal in Calgary, on October 1, 1964, the original CBX transmitter was decommissioned. The single station was split into two distinct 50,000-watt stations with their own studios: one transmitting near Edmonton and one transmitting near Calgary.

The Edmonton station kept the CBX call sign but moved to a frequency of 740 kHz, while the Calgary station obtained the CBR call sign but kept CBX's former frequency of 1010 kHz and clear-channel designation.

Nested FM
On March 16, 2006, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) approved an application by the station to implement a new, nested FM transmitter in Calgary. It would simulcast the AM programming, due to the AM signal's poor reception in some parts of the city.

This new FM signal, CBR-1-FM 99.1 was launched on November 28, 2006. In recent years, the CBC has branded 99.1 as the main transmitter, even though 1010 AM is technically the main station.

Various other AM and FM rebroadcasters have been installed throughout southern Alberta to carry CBR's programming.

On December 19, 2008, the licensee proposed to use a subsidiary communications authority (SCA) channel to broadcast multi-cultural programs.

New AM site
On July 7, 2011, the CRTC approved an application by the CBC to relocate CBR's transmitter and antenna array from their original site in southeast Calgary. They would be moved to a site 25 km to the northeast in Rocky View County.

Despite changing the transmitter's location, all other technical parameters would remain unchanged. The move was completed in 2013.

Local programming
CBR's local programs are Calgary Eyeopener on weekday mornings, and The Homestretch on weekday afternoons.

Transmitters
On January 18, 1993, the CRTC approved the CBC's application to operate new FM transmitters at Medicine Hat 98.3 MHz and Etzikom 92.1 MHz. The new FM transmitter at Medicine Hat would replace CJMH the existing AM transmitter 1460 kHz owned by Monarch Broadcasting Ltd. Monarch would surrender the license of CJMH once the new transmitters were in operation.

On August 15, 2013, the CRTC approved the deletion of AM transmitters CBXC 1450 kHz Coleman and CBXL 860 kHz Blairmore.

On April 30, 2015, the CBC submitted an application to add a new FM transmitter at 103.9 MHz in Lake Louise with the call sign CBRQ-FM. The CRTC approved the CBC's application to operate a CBC Radio One transmitter at Lake Louise on July 14, 2015. The 103.9 MHz frequency was previously used by a radio station VF2105 in Lake Louise which was owned by the Lake Louise Community Association.

title: CBR (AM)


text:
Talk:Coal Region

Comment
Does anyone have a reference for the population figure? Or is it sum of 2000 census fiogures for the related counties? User:RyanDiS

Deep mining image?
Somehow the "Deep Anthracite Coal Mining ..." image doesn't look much like mining. How long has the youngster been a miner, and what do those clothes look like at the end of the workday? (SEWilco 06:55, 19 August 2005 (UTC))
 * Agreed. Removed the tourist photo. Vsmith 11:15, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Pioneer (Hard coal)Anthracite mine tour in Schuylkill County
It was a picture at the * Pioneer Coal Mine tour in Ashland. It's really a cool deep mine tour into the mountain, where they provide jackets cause of the constant 50 degrees farenheight temp. If you ever get in the coal region. I'm sure you would find it most interesting, how they follow what is called "The mammoth vein" of Anthracite in deep coal mining.

PS: That's my step son he's a good kid,and has Asperger's syndrome. Not sure if you know what it is..... He's really smart, Einstein had the same thing! Not a problem with the deletion of the pic.

Regards, Scotty

 * It sounds interesting. Maybe someone in the tour will take some useful pictures of the mine or equipment.  (SEWilco 14:04, 21 August 2005 (UTC))

Yea well, its pretty hard to do since its all black inside, even with a flash. Scotty

 * Good one Wilco!, Where did you get the picture? Better watch the copyright police might hit ya up....

 * LOL, I tried getting a picture inside believe me, and that is exactly the way it came out.

 * Next time I go again, I will just try again....It is hard since its confined too.

 * Back to listening to "Acoustic sunrise"
 * ...here Sunday morning...w/ coffee.
 *

Regards, Scotty

Dauphin County?
I removed Dauphin County from the list of counties in the Coal Region. Dauphin County, which contains Harrisburg, is not in the Coal Region. 136.142.21.58 21:10, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Part of the Western Middle Coal Field extends into Dauphin County (Lykens, Big Lick). Dddstone (talk) 13:55, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Anthracite region or Hard Coal region
There are many many "coal towns", "coal mansions" and coal mines (all 9 alive) in the Southwestern part of the commonwealth. The reason given as to why Pittsburgh took off as the Steel Capital and not Birmingham or Youngstown or Duluth is because it and not those cities were surrounded by one of the richest veins of coal. Growing up I was always taught that the "coal region" was from Altoona to Johnstown to Greensburg to Uniontown to Morgantown to Fairmont. Trust me King Coal is there. Also Eastern Kentucky and Southern West Virginia might also have a claim ("Coal miners daughter"). Why not a change to Anthracite Region or Hard Coal Region or a disambig page to introduce E. Ky. and SW Pa.
 * "Why not a change to Anthracite Region or Hard Coal Region..." Because no one calls this particular section of Pennsylvania, "The Anthracite Region" or "The Hard Coal Region".  It has been known as "The Coal Region" among the residents of Eastern PA, going back to the late 1800s.  The name doesn't imply any kind of exclusivity, that there's no coal under any other parts of PA, or in other states. It's just what people who live here have called it.  Similarly, the area that takes in the upper end of Lehigh County, and parts of Schuylkill and Carbon Counties, is called "The Slate Belt".  It doesn't mean there's no slate anyplace else.  It's just that residents of the region have called it that for generations, because slate is quarried there.  Best regardsTheBaron0530 (talk) 16:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Why Pittsburgh is the steel capital of PA
Pittsburgh is the steel capital of PA for more reasons than just coal. First, it was easy to ship in iron ore from the Great Lakes by way of canals and rivers. Second, bituminous coal is plentiful. Third, access to the "three rivers" Ohio, Allegheny, and Monongahela Rivers provided a way to transport the finished steel to the Mississipppi and into the growing country i.e. "Mid West". Remember, America was moving westward at the same time Pittsburgh was becoming a major steel producer. The combination of ore, coal and easy transportation made the Pittsburgh area ideal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomyork68 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Coal Region. 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/20050116090352/http://www.dep.state.pa.us:80/dep/deputate/enved/go_with_inspector/coalmine/Anthracite_Coal_Mining.htm to http://www.dep.state.pa.us/dep/deputate/enved/go_with_inspector/coalmine/Anthracite_Coal_Mining.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050120091305/http://www.phmc.state.pa.us:80/ppet/eckley/page1.asp?secid=31 to http://www.phmc.state.pa.us/ppet/eckley/page1.asp?secid=31

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:03, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Susquehanna County
The anthracite coal mining region even extends into Susquehanna County ... which is not mentioned here. There are coal mines, as well as a monument to local coal miners in Forest City, northeast of Carbondale over the county line in Susquehanna County. Just as the southwestern most tip of the anthracite region extends down into Dauphin County (Lykens, PA) it extends some 135 miles up to Forest City. 68.80.192.101 (talk) 16:38, 25 June 2018 (UTC)buddmar

title: Talk:Coal Region


text:
Talk:Violence Against Women Act

Untitled
It points to the "Violence Against Women and Department of Justice Reauthorization Act of 2005". Surely a copy of such a monumental act exists somewhere. I suggest somebody find it and put it there. I'm bloody exhausted. Kire1975 (talk) 08:11, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

restitution
I think the word 'restitution' is used wrong: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=restitution —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.150.235.215 (talk • contribs)

 * Where and why to you think 'restitution' is used wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kire1975 (talk • contribs) 08:16, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Section Regarding Men's Rights Activist Groups Reaction
I think this section should be deleted or significantly paired down as unsourced and violating wp:NPOV. The only reference is to a political activist group whose agenda is reflected by this section. Anybody else have thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcbiglaw (talk • contribs)

 * The section is obviously POV and original research. I've pared it down to one sentence, which I hope is more or less representative of the views of some men's rights groups. Any more might be giving undue weight to a marginal point of view, when the article is really about the act itself. Next time, do feel free to make bold editing decisions like this yourself - if you're worried it's controversial, just leave a note on the talk page explaining why you did it. --Grace 03:31, 20 June 2006

The section on Men's/Father's rights activists has violated wp:NPOV... again. I've cut it down to just one sentence, although I think it should be rephrased to sound more neutral. I'm also concerned that the majority of the links in this piece point to sites promoting an anti-VAWA agenda. I feel that it compromises the neutrality of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by tekanji (talk • contribs)

 * I just deleted the section that said "some father's rights groups/men's rights groups" due to POV and first hand use of "feminazi" for POV. The links provided do not back up what it said. It should not be hard to find the FR or MR group that opposes the Act and give reasons for it, but that was just blatantly POV and name-calling for Wiki.NeoApsara 19:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

This article has a unbalanced POV that does portrays men as perpetrators and woman as victems. The neutrality of the article is not compromised by criticisms, and it is necessary to point out the abuse and misuse of VAWA restraining orders just as it is necessary to point out the absurdity or injustice by NAZI's or communists to adequately describe them. David Letterman recieved a domestic violence injunction from a woman 2000 miles away for sending her 'subliminal' messages over the TV airways, millions of men recieve similar injunctions for absurd reasons that do not involve any actual physical violence, usually in the context of divorce for the woman to automatically win sole custody of the children and possession of the home and marital assets. This article needs an unbiased POV that will allow criticims and point out this abuse of VAWA and false allegations. --User:loneranger4justice\loneranger4justice 18 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is feminist, misandrous, gynocentric POV, so I have added a section on 'criticisms' to provide a balanced POV. Many of the links, articles etc reference criticisms of VAWA and hundreds of other sources are readily found with any quick internet search. For some reason the links section will not appear after this recent revision, please re-insert the links, but do not remove the 'criticism' section that is badly needed to balance this otherwise biased article. --User:loneranger4justice\loneranger4justice 25 September 2006

Edited and restored criticisms and links for a more balanced POV- this article is being vandalized by those who attempt to stifle the criticims that the VAWA is misandrous, prejudice and discriminates against men - which is the main crticism against the VAWA. User:loneranger4justice\loneranger4justice 10 October 2006 (UTC)

This site is being vandalized and used to instill feminist POV. references and links to sites critical of VAWA are deleted, then crticism of VAWA are deleted for being unsourced or claims of POV, then constantly reverted back to revised PC POV version with no discussion. Recommend a non-feminist non-POV moderator for this site. User:loneranger4justice\loneranger4justice 11 October 2006 (UTC)

 * NO NO No- People please take a good look at where the information comes from that says men are just as likely to be victims of aggression or that women are more likely to be the initiator. Seriously, take a look at it.  They look at primary agression.  It is not about who the primary agressor is.  Rather, it is about the pattern of abuse.  Women are far less likely to be the perpetrator of the abuse.  There is a huge difference between primary agression and patterned abuse.  Also, it is a lot less likely to be reported if the man is the abuser, because of this pattern which in turn means that the abuser is so controlled by the abuser and fearful, that it will not be reported.  The fact of the matter is: the deeper the abuse runs, the more afraid the victim is and the less likely they are to report.  Also, when the abuse has become a cycle, it is more than likely to be kept private.  This means that an abused woman may feel that she has an opportunity to retaliate in public when people are around and she feels safe to do so, even though it is more likely to be reported by a bystander.  Now lets get to more real talk.  when a female get up in your face, how do you react?  Do you become paralized with fear?  Well, if you are like most men, you laugh or think: oh, she's so cute when she is angry.  Honestly, think about it.  Now some will say that men are less likely to report out of shame.  Do you think the shame of a woman who has built her life around this man only to find out how he really is would be any less?  I know I didn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.221.205.86 (talk • contribs)

 * Were you covering your ears and shaking your head when you shouted "No No No"? That's how I pictured it when I read that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.143.5 (talk) 06:08, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Seems to me you are trying to make an argument towards one point of view. It's not your place to dictate what can and can't go into the article, based on your own biases and perceptions. If the content is sourced, you don't get to remove it because you don't like the implications. This response of yours is basically an admission of guilt of biased tampering. 206.223.168.238 (talk) 21:10, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

One should first start at Wikipedia's entry for Misandry, VAWA,DV Violence against women, Domestic Violence are all misandristic tactics feminists propagandists also put foward Power and Control as an attack solely aginst males as a sex and use open Propaganda "Power and Control Wheel" which is not a peer reviewed empirical model but rather an embodiment of what somen seek advantage in over men. The Power and Control Wheel decries budgets in a husband wife setting, where a freshman taking Econ 101 would know all units require budgets. The Misandry Caucus has espewed propaganda as fact for at least three decades and this deserves the highest degree of examination. NO NO NO below has reversed the facts and presnted a propaganda piece: for instance "the continuing pattern of abuse" which includes any effort to maintain a family budget, women make the largest (by dollar volume USD) share of retail purchases and efforts to thwart that spending pattern, as by a Family budget, is then abuse. Abuse is also denigration of another such as you are not good enough for me to sleep with tonight, or "be a man", "get me this" or "do this", and if you do not I am taking the kids.VAWA is indeed a political piece where some women and certainly the misandry caucus seek leverage over the male citizens of their country for personal gain. Keep this discussion open it will take time to link the sources, and cite them, overwhelming evidence USDOJ, RADAR, et al demonstrates female perpetration as more pervasive, further the totality of what is alleged by some to be abusive or violent (such as budget, not my fault comes from the Wheel) behavior. There has been a huge amount of political activity around this for years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BobV01 (talk • contribs) 13:50, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

This information should be of interest:
 * U.S. women doing fine without International Violence Against Women Act by Phyllis Schlafly 81.64.205.95 12:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Just read this for my own knowledge, and have to say it's not very informative at all. Only negative aspects of the bill are included. Criticism is fine but this article is really unbalanced. What does Feibert's study have to do with the VAWA act, for one?? Don't know much about Schlafly but she's hardly a good reference point for an editor trying to be neutral. Dinorific 07:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Links are ridiculously one-sided as well! Dinorific 07:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

This is bullshit. This is about as NPOV as WW2 propaganda. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.213.144.164 (talk • contribs)

 * "The feminists have continued their campaign against marriage through Joe Biden's favorite legislation, the Violence Against Women Act, which provides a billion dollars a year to feminist centers to promote divorce and oppose reconciliation" writes Phyllis Schlafly. "The act is based on feminist ideology that women are naturally victims entitled to tax-paid legal and financial assistance, while men are naturally batterers who are not entitled even to due process protections." Asteriks (talk) 17:33, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

So the truth is unwelcome! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.56.6.172 (talk) 03:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Criticism
In addition to the fact that this article needs to be cleaned up, someone needs to include the fact that many men claim to have been unfairly proesecuted, denied their constitutional rights, ect. . . under VAWA. As for Schlafly I believe her views should be included as representing one side of the arguement as she is both a constitutional lawyer, and the countries leading feminist basher and opponent of VAWA. It isn't POV to include major critics critism as long as you give both sides a mention. 216.255.40.133 07:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

The criticism section needs work. Not only is it the first section besides the overview, but the heading isn't "criticisms" - it's one criticism like it's the top issue surrounding VAWA. Not to mention that VAWA has been used against its original intentions by anti-immigration lawmakers. Please, someone who knows more, clean this up!! Glitterglue 19:38, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Keep your RFC open for awhile, a clean definition, will take considerable time, VAWA is a political piece with valid political amplification from many points of view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BobV01 (talk • contribs) 13:53, August 27, 2007 (UTC) A balanced article on VAWA should also reference the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in the year 2000 of the 1994 Act's unconstitutionality (U.S. v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 598)Liberty1st (talk) 18:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The criticism section of the article states: "The censorship and secrecy around VAWA is so strong that everytime immigration fraud is mentioned in this Wiki article, someone removes it." True or false, isn't that more for the discussion page and not the article itself? I'm new to this page (and generally don't use Wikipedia to inform myself on political matters - but surely there's got to be a way to point to a page that generally (or even specifically) discusses immigration fraud rather than making an extraneous comment about censorship in a particular article? Plainstarchedtom (talk) 15:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Removed as it is unneeded —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.108.154 (talk) 16:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Could you please be more specific? Also please sign your contributions with four tildas I.E. ~ * 4. Thank you. YouAndMeBabyAintNothingButCamels (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure where to put this comment, so here will do I guess. The article contains nothing about the provisions of the law. We hear about when it was passed, who administers it, criticisms of it, but nothing about what the law actually says. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.61.139.28 (talk) 22:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Request for comment
I've opened an RFC on this page to establish whether Criticism section is violating WP:NPOV or not. The criticism section that has been posted into this article and parts of it into Pro-feminist men may be a povpush by User:Loneranger4justice. This diff shows the most recent re-insertion by Loneranger4justice. What I see wrong with the section is that it violates neutral point of view, borders on soapboxing, is possibly synthesising sources and in other places is unverified.

The final sentences of the second paragraph have been added to 2 other articles: Feminazi and Pro-feminist men. These lines are unsourced pov: "Critics of VAWA reject inferences that instill gender politics of radical feminists and pro-feminist men by portrayal of women as victims and men as perpetrators and view the VAWA as discriminatory toward men as would be a Violence Against White's Act toward blacks. False allegations of violence or of a sexual nature was also a main tactic of the WKKK to encourage discrimination of black men." These lines have been removed.

The external links to eagleforum.org are also violations of WP:EL.

This material is not neutral and not properly verified by reliable sources and has been reinserted by revert by Loneranger4justice twice this month here and 6 times since February 2007 on Profeminist men. Loneranger4justice has few other contributions to wikipedia outside of adding these criticisms and making these reverts. They have twice been warned at level 4 (final warning) for NPOV about this.-- Cailil  talk 13:37, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

 * The material is not neutral, but that is irrelevant as to whether it violates NPOV. It is appropriate to include non-neutral things (in fact it is a requirement of NPOV to do so) in order to make the article NPOV.  Good and appropriate challenges to the position of some main pov in the article is appropriate.  The edit that is presented here has some failures though. It should not weasle word saying "some critics say X".  It should simply point out the criticism with a reference. So the introductory phrase in the first sentence, first paragraph should be deleted.  The second paragraph may be true but it is unreferenced.  Without a reference it should get a  tag and then if it fails to get a cite in a month, take it out of the article.   In both cases, the relevance of the criticism to the main article should either be clear or it should be made clearer. --Blue Tie 16:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Critics Win Again
Another blow for justice by men (and a female victim of female violence) in a decision by a California appellate court. Victory! CA Appellate Court Says Excluding Men from Domestic Violence Programs is Unconstitutional http://mensnewsdaily.com/glennsacks/2008/10/14/victory-ca-appellate-court-says-excluding-men-from-domestic-violence-programs-is-unconstitutional/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.251.254.172 (talk) 15:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup to do - 2009
The following things probably need to be addressed in this article. --Lendorien (talk) 14:26, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Biden proposed bill info needs to be culled. This article is about VAWA, not a failed unrelated bill. (done)
 * New section needed. Specifically, a background/History section detailing the history of the bill, the debate and related information.
 * Background section is subjective. Needs removal or rewriting. Suggest replacing with a above suggested history section.
 * A debate section covering criticism as well as supporting arguments.
 * Better sourcing, especially for details in intro.
 * The section containing info on the Texas organization probably should be deleted. It's blatant advertising and doesn't seem to be directly related.

Proposed reorganization
I suggest that this article be reorganized as follows
 * Introduction - Solid as is. Needs better sourcing.
 * History - containing backgrouns ont he bill. Impetus for writing the bill, sponsors, the debate on the bill, bill passing, subsequent legal challenges to the bill, etc. subsection as needed.
 * Bill provisions - Specific provisions of the bill
 * Criticisms and debate - info on the debate over the bill, arguments for and against
 * There must be discussion on the Green Card loophole issue. Thousands of innocent Americans are being arrested each year because of this, and no Wiki article on VAWA would be fair or neutral unless the topic is dealt with.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kops2222 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Quote for the Criticism section
"In a human love affair between a man and a woman, the secrets of meeting and personal experiences are fully guarded for reasons of their own. Only then are they sweet, enjoyable, memorable and above all, undisturbed by others."

The author, Dr. Ravindra Kumar, does NOT have a WP article. The publisher is Llewellyn Worldwide. The publication, Kundalini for Beginners, is currently footnote 7 in the past life regression article.

Any thoughts on whether the above quote is appropriate to include in the criticism section? Kammel Toe (talk) 05:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

V.A.W.A. Green Card fraud
It is now clear throughout the United States that the loophole in V.A.W.A. Green Card issuance is causing thousands of innocent Americas to be sent to jail on false assualt charges. I am not the written of the men's rights stuff below, and those writers are not as articulate as I am, but the issue must be dealt with. I support other aspects of VAWA, but it is clear that some reform or procedural protections need to be put in place. Russian crime groups have figured out the VAWA loophole, and NYC family courts are now flooded with bogus abuse claims related to these Green Cards. Make thoughtful edits, but do not delete these sections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kops2222 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

There is an editor who is trying to refer to ANY mention of the VAWA Green Card Situation as vandalism. This witter is one of the thousands of innocent Americans who was framed on false assault charges as part of a VAWA Green Card fraud, as have thousands of other innocent Americans, several other of whom are also apparently trying to edit this page. While we realize that one editor feels that VAWA is perfect, and no information can be included in this page that is at derrogatory of VAWA. You claim about specific cases being mentioned is true, and the Klimnko case is backed up by two decisions of the NY 2nd Appellate Decisions which are both public record, and the facts are part of the appellate record. The editor who keeps removing ALL references to the VAWA Green Card loophole, and the resultant arrests of thousnads of innocent Americans, is violating the Wiki neutral point of view. One of the source web sites is NY ecourts. Another references a major televion station and investigative report, which also shows two more specific cases. This will not go away. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kops2222 (talk • contribs)

 * Kops, the section is problematic because of the way it's written. It needs to be carefully sourced, preferably to secondary sources (e.g. newspapers or books), and written in a disinterested tone. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 00:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I've reverted this again. You're naming what appear to be living people, but using only primary sources to write about them. You must use secondary sources e.g. newspapers or books. Please read our policy on living persons, Biographies of living persons, carefully before proceeding. This section must not be restored with that material in it, unless you find reliable secondary sources and stick closely to what they say. Also, please note that the sources must discuss the case with reference to the Violence Against Women Act. We can't publish material about living persons based on a Wikipedian putting two and two together: see WP:SYN. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 03:34, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

 * I've posted the following on your talk page. I'm repeating it here to make sure that you see it.

 * I'm even more confused now that I've read through the court document. It doesn't seem to mention the two names you published, but does seem to be about you. This is highly inappropriate; see WP:COI, WP:BLP, and WP:NOR. You really must not restore it, or you risk being blocked, as this is a serious violation of our policies. The purpose of Wikpedia articles is only to tell readers what reliable sources (and that usually means secondary sources such as books, newspapers, and academic articles) are saying about a given topic. We're not allowed to use articles to engage in personal advocacy, and particularly not where living people are concerned. SlimVirgin  talk| contribs 03:51, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
 * For the record, if the above editor is implying that I am the "one editor [who] feels that VAWA is perfect," they are wrong (the implication is ludicrous). I have no dog in this fight: my interest is to keep encyclopedic articles free from non-neutral statements and especially, in this case, from BLP violations. Drmies (talk) 15:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Removed criticism of Massachusetts law
I removed two paragraphs from the criticism section, as they appear to be directed at Massachusetts state law, and not the Federal law that is the subject of this article. (I presume the Fatherhood Coalition comment refers to the entry dated February 14, 2010, which is talking about Massachusetts HB 4443.) The two paragraphs are preserved below (with reference citations turned into plain links), in case somebody wants to restore them with an explanation of the connection to the Federal law. Sam8 (talk) 21:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

 * A main criticism of VAWA is that it allows an individual to claim 'fear' of imminent physical harm(http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/gl-209a-toc.htm) without any supporting physical evidence to obtain a restraining order. This has resulted in an explosion of orders, principally by women against men, in order to get leverage in divorce and child custody cases. The effect on those charged under VAWA include loss of children, home, finances and stable employment. In Massachusetts(http://www.mass.gov/courts/courtsandjudges/courts/stats/index.html) some 30-50,000 ROs are issued annually.

 * Other defects in the law include a loss of the constitutional right to trial by jury. Fathers' rights organizations such as the The Fatherhood Coalition(http://www.fatherhoodcoalition.org) have called for the repeal of the law.

added VAWA criticism
I'm a real person really appealing VAWA in the U.S. Supreme Court. I appreciate other people's view however I do not appreciate the deletion of mine. What I stated were not view but facts and legal concerns which concern men and women's needs equally.

I do not appreciate technocrats nor feudalism. Leave my words alone unless there is better criticism to replace them with. But deleting all criticism might just get you sued.

No. 09-2291,	John Hendrickson v. Loudoun County et al				1:09-cv-00563-CMH-IDD

This was first filed In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia Alexandria Division

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sven nestle (talk • contribs) 18:11, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

removing from VAWA criticism
I'd like to remove this statement because is it argues against its own point, which is preposterous It is "politically charged", it cites targets of Democratic criticism that have no real involvement with VAWA in any way.

"Various groups and persons including Rush Limbaugh, Marc H. Rudov and Glenn Sacks have voiced concerns that VAWA violates due process, equal protection and other civil rights."

Criticism section - reliable sources
Their editor review guidelines are |here and |here. You may also select from one of hundreds of other reliable sources or the primary source however i seem to recall SlimVirgin writing in one of her wiki-policy docs that we dont have a hierarchy of reliability on WP. thanx YouAndMeBabyAintNothingButCamels (talk) 06:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (if you get a page error delete the URL extension so the URL says "editorial-guidelines" & "faq")
 * See this discussion - I've brought this up before and others agreed with me. I think if you want to use it, you need to get agreement at the RSN board. Dougweller (talk) 09:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've linked to the press release. But why was this under criticism? I've changed the section heading, removed the bit about high school and suicide as that was just one small part, and put in the main thing which was domestic violence month. Dougweller (talk) 10:06, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree the focus of the press release was no criticism of VAWA and the bit about high school and suicide was just one small part of the press release. YouAndMeBabyAintNothingButCamels (talk) 05:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Any claim to helping children needs to be removed or verified
There are a number of sections within this article that claim VAWA helps children. Aside from the fact they are very poorly sourced (if at all), and should never have been put up, it is also demonstrably false...

VAWA's STOP funding guidelines for several states (I only checked a few, but all I checked had it), specifically prohibits programs applying for funding to exclusively benefit children...

For those that actually believe VAWA is intended to help children...

Hawaii VAWA STOP funding guidlines.
 * Page 2-6
 * Section 2 Service Specifications
 * I. Introduction
 * G. Limitations on STOP Program Funding
 * "Children’s services supported by STOP Program funds must show an inextricable link and be the direct result of providing services to an adult victim of violence against women."

 * http://www.state.hi.us/spo2/health/rfp103f/attachments/rfp7411265074918.pdf

Louisiana STOP VAWA application instructions
 * Page VAWA-4
 * General Funding Information
 * Funding Priorities
 * Prohibited Activities or Uses of Funds
 * "Prohibited Activities or Uses of Funds
 * 6: Supporting Services that focus exclusively on children"

 * http://www.cole.state.la.us/programs%5Cuploads%5CVAWA%5CVAWA_App_Instruct_rev_072010.pdf

Kentucky ARRA & VAWA STOP Formula Grant Guidelines
 * Page 13 of 30
 * Administrative Requirements
 * Applicant Eligibility
 * Additional Considerations
 * "Children’s services supported with the funds must be a direct result of providing services to an adult primary victim. VAWA grant funds may not be used to support services that focus exclusively on children …"

 * http://justice.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/19707F82-27E3-4A19-A282-7865F287DE3E/0/VAWA_arra_guidelines_instructions.pdf

Now, I acknowledge that this can not be included in the article, as it constitutes original research, but it clearly demonstrates a need for any claims that VAWA helps children be thoroughly, verifiably sourced with more then simple hearsay. --Kratch (talk) 06:27, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Sound like it helps children, but not independently of spouses. That would be a pretty simple, 'yes, it helps children' then.  76.21.107.221 (talk) 23:48, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

criticism not allowed
Why is that adding a criticism section is not allowed to where the entire article is locked from being edited? Boobymonster (talk) 15:00, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Is there a source to the budgetary impacts of this law?
I've seen lots of comments as to the budgetary costs of this law, but no citations. Has anyone seen such? It doesn't seem to be a large bill. 76.21.107.221 (talk) 23:44, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

 * The lead section says $1.6 billion, though there is no citation for this. I assume that's annually, not a lump sum, but it would be nice to confirm this. --GentlemanGhost (talk) 18:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

March 25, 2012 Huffington Post excerpt
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/25/arlen-specter-gop-women-life-among-the-cannibals_n_1378308.html

When asked whether he thinks the GOP is hurting its prospects with women voters, he exclaimed, "Terribly! Terribly!"

"You can't win a presidency, a general election in Pennsylvania with that stand," he said. "The suburbs of places like Philadelphia decide the presidential election. Everybody knows where California and New York are going. Everybody knows where Texas and Mississippi and Louisiana are going. But Florida and Pennsylvania and a few other states determine it. That just won't sell. That's why [Rick] Santorum got drubbed in 2006 [during his Senate reelection race]."

The latest controversy is the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act, a landmark piece of legislation that has never before sparked partisan battles -- until now.

On Feb. 2, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation (S. 1925) reauthorizing VAWA, which expired in September. The bill was sponsored by Chair Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Sen. Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) -- who is not on the committee -- and cosponsored by 34 senators from both parties. Nevertheless, the legislation attracted no GOP support among committee members and passed out of committee on a party-line vote of 10-8. It was, according to Leahy's office, the first time VAWA legislation did not receive bipartisan backing out of committee.

Specter, along with then-Democratic Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.), was an original cosponsor of VAWA.

When asked what he thinks of the law becoming partisan, he said, "I think it's very sad."

"I have followed Sen. [Jeff] Sessions' comments to the press that there are some provisions they don't like. But the basic Act is very very important and ought to be passed. Whatever differences there are can be worked out on the floor with amendments," he added.

Sessions, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently said he favors reauthorizing VAWA, but he accused Democrats of being the ones to make it political and argued that the current version has provisions that "almost seem to invite opposition."

“You think that’s possible?" he told The New York Times. "You think they might have put things in there we couldn’t support that maybe then they could accuse you of not being supportive of fighting violence against women?” Raymm (talk) 21:32, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Bogus ACLU Citation Link.
There is the following link listed in the citations. At the time of my writing this, it was citation #7:

 * "Tell Congress to Support the Violence Against Women Act". (embedded link to https://secure.aclu.org/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&id=251&page=UserAction) American Civil Liberties Union.

This was a citation in support of the following under "Debate and Legal Standing":

 * The American Civil Liberties Union had originally expressed concerns about the Act, saying that the increased penalties were rash, the increased pretrial detention was "repugnant" to the US Constitution, the mandatory HIV testing of those only charged but not convicted is an infringement of a citizen’s right to privacy and the edict for automatic payment of full restitution was non-judicious (see their paper: "Analysis of Major Civil Liberties Abuses in the Crime Bill Conference Report as Passed by the House and the Senate", dated September 29, 1994). However, the ACLU has supported reauthorization of VAWA on the condition that the "unconstitutional DNA provision" be removed.[7]

Citation #7 does not support the final statement starting with "However". It is a link to a donation page on the ACLU site.Tgm1024 (talk) 04:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Fixed -- pointed to the archived page on Archive.org. -- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:39, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Non encyclopedic: "the Court's conservative wing overturned the provision". There *IS* no officially conservative wing.
I understand that there are people who are angry about the turning over of the Violence Against Women Act, but despite the citations, you *cannot* refer to a "conservative wing" of the SCOTUS! That's a matter of opinion, and despite any number of statistics you bring up, you need to reword this as "the justices who are commonly thought of as conservative" or better words to that effect. There is NO officially conservative wing of the supreme court, and to say otherwise sounds like an opinion paper. Take your partisan anger elsewhere and be careful please.Tgm1024 (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a wing of the Court which is consistently described by reliable sources as "conservative". Our policies mandate that we reflect the content of reliable sources. The reliable sources cited in this article clearly and directly support the text you're questioning. I don't see the need for a contrived, wordy work-around, and would rather we just state the obvious, as do the cited reliable sources. MastCell Talk 20:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

States' Rights v. Federalism in Morrison
I don't read Morrison as a state's rights issue, but instead as a federalism issue. I suppose it can be characterized as a states' rights issue in that the states have only given certain enumerated powers to the federal government, but Morrison was more concerned about what the federal government CAN'T do than what states CAN do.

Dustinscottc (talk) 04:07, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

 * I agree, and I've changed this passage to link to Commerce Clause. JamesMLane t c 17:24, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Suggest moving some material out of summary to article body
I would suggest that the summary could be pared down to essential information and much of the information incorporated in the body of the article. For instance, the numerical outcomes of the 2013 votes is not something which helps a brief summary of the topic, but this information should be included in the article, certainly. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 15:38, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Violence Against Women Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/05/15/scotus.violence/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:14, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Protecting gays
Clarity needed on the following: "In April 2012, the Senate voted to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act, and the House subsequently passed its own measure (omitting provisions of the Senate bill that would protect gays, Native Americans living in reservations, and illegal immigrants who are victims of domestic violence). Reconciliation of the two bills was stymied by procedural measures, leaving the re-authorization in question"

Protect gays? Does this mean it removed protections for women assaulted or abused by women with whom they are in a relationship? Or does it mean "gays" particularly? Gays is imprecise, many women in relationships with women are bisexual or pansexual, not gay. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.60.230 (talk) 08:42, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Remmarriages After Divorced
This is On my : My legal Case On USCIS. This are the Marriages of my Husbands Gary Moon. Brigitte Heinrich Date of Marriage; 2/22/1063   Date of Divorced;10/3/1968 Germany June E.Moon       Date of Marriage: 6/22/1968   Date of Divorced;10/1/2012  USA Edna Manliclic-Moon Date of Marriage: 9/28/2003 Barcelona Spain Remarried Date of Marriage; 1/24/213  Summerville SC

My husband is A Retired Vietnam Vet. I'm sure all this marriages are on his Personal Records on file. June E Moon Complained about me in USCIS. I was given Lawful Permanent Card and Gary Moon was not divorced at the time we got married .USCIS Condemned me For Reasons that Gary Moon Was not Free to marry me that time Gray Moon Married me 2003. In your judgement and according to the Dates of Marriages and Divorced Dates of Gary Moon.Who is Illegitimately Married to Gary Moon and he is  not Free to marry. My Husband Gary Moon is Very Much Free to marry me No matter how you look at this Dates. Wives that are not truthful,LAW should be imposed strickly no matter if it is American or Alien. There are times Military personnel does things differently.My husband was not even on Begamy. Thank you Edna Manliclic -Moon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.107.197.161 (talk) 18:28, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect vote in image for Montana
Steve Daines of Montana voted Aye for the re-authorization, but the map shows Montana as a No vote. I know that he later voted to defund it, but the vote the image is discussing is simply the re-authorization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.131.103.111 (talk) 16:10, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

172 Republicans vote to oppose Violence Against Women Act

 * https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/violence-against-women-act-house-vote-b1818845.html
 * https://www.thecut.com/2021/03/172-republicans-vote-to-oppose-violence-against-women-act.html
 * http://www.therepublic.com/2021/03/18/pence-votes-against-the-violence-against-women-act-which-includes-funding-for-turning-point-in-columbus/

John Cummings (talk) 22:15, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Public Writing
— Assignment last updated by Joy.Zheying.Shi (talk) 04:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Confused by this sentence in Background section:
"Although it's hard to calculate the increase in criminal costs, its influence on social welfare should be negligent regarding the huge amount of decrease in victimization costs."

I'm a little confused by this sentence and hope someone with more experience can reassure me that the changes I'm proposing are appropriate:

"Although it's hard to calculate the increase in criminal costs, its influence on social welfare expenses should be negligible considering the huge decrease in victimization costs."

I'll leave it to someone else to address the vague and unsourced reference to "victimization costs." Noctuella (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

U.S. v Rahimi addressed the law's firearm restrictions for domestic abusers
Quite interesting how Mother Jones specified it., in contrast to CNN, which addressed it as the "1994 law," and the Associated Press, which referred to it as the "1994 ban."Speakfor23 (talk) 00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Violence Against Women Act


text:
User:Dervish Tsaddik

''It's coming through a hole in the air, from those nights in Tiananmen Square. It's coming from the feel that this ain't exactly real, or it's real, but it ain't exactly there.''

It's coming from the sorrow in the street, the holy places where the races meet; from the homicidal bitchin' that goes down in every kitchen to determine who will serve and who will eat.

''It's coming to America first, the cradle of the best and of the worst. It's here they got the range and the machinery for change and it's here they got the spiritual thirst.''

''It's coming from the women and the men. O baby, we'll be making love again. We'll be going down so deep the river's going to weep, and the mountain's going to shout Amen! It's coming like the tidal flood beneath the lunar sway, imperial, mysterious, in amorous array.''

L Cohen

title: User:Dervish Tsaddik


text: User talk:129.170.130.152

title: User talk:129.170.130.152


text:
CBR-FM

CBR-FM is a Canadian radio station, broadcasting on 102.1 FM in Calgary, Alberta. It broadcasts the programming of the CBC Music network. CBR-FM's studios are located on Westmount Boulevard Northwest just west of downtown Calgary, while its transmitter is located at 85th Street Southwest and Old Banff Coach Road in western Calgary. CBR-FM was launched on September 29, 1975.

The jazz program Tonic, hosted by Tim Tamashiro, originated from CBR-FM. It previously hosted only the weekend version until the retirement of Montreal-based weekday host Katie Malloch in 2012.

As of Winter 2020, CBR-FM is the 14th-most-listened-to radio station in the Calgary market according to a PPM data report released by Numeris.

title: CBR-FM