text:
Talk:Chain gang

Slavery
Why the big section on slavery? In the U.S. for example, chain-gang is far from slavery, requiring, among other things: conviction of a serious crime, the option of a jury trial, access to legal counsel and appeals, definite periods of confinement, Constitutional guarantees against cruel and unusual punishment, etc... The obvious reasons for blurring the line by introducing and even explicitly stating that chain ganging is slavery is to thereby attach an equal stigma to chain-gangs as is attached with slavery.
 * More importantly, slavery is legal for prisoners. Read the 14th amendment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.122.63.142 (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you mean the 13th amendment not the 14th, but your right that the amendment does say "except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted" twfowler (talk) 14:59, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Blatant and irrelevant P.O.V. advancement. Very good example of a very bad article which has been "hijacked" to portray a POV. Please keep it to the FACTS! Thank You,

~Keith Chambers

Chain gangs are arguably a form of slavery- but so is any unpaid or compulsory labour performed by a prisoner. There are international conventions against prisoners being made to work for no pay - these are not observed by China! But to say that chain gangs are a way of preserving African servitude is ridiculous. Chain gangs are (were) made up of prisoners, not Africans.JohnC (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Having reviewed the history (I did not write the original version), I agree it had a POV problem, but the association between chain gangs and slavery is almost universal among historians. this view, for example, is not at all controversial historically. I'll try to clean up the article and make it more informative. Ken 08:45, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
 * In the deep south (Alabama/Mississippi/Arkansas) before the civil rights movement (and to a lesser-extent, up until present day), it historically didn't take much for a Black man to get convicted of a trivial crime and sentenced to hard time. This typically included chain-gang time. Look at Jim Crow laws and other attempts to subjugate African Americans; chain gangs are---in many cases---more of the same. In this context, it is understandable, and even essential, that the link to slavery be acknowledged. Safety Cap 15:32, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I still have problems with the initial two paragraphs. The language seems to advance a position rather than stating documented historical fact or quotes of opinions. Wuapinmon 13:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The article still is pretty biased. The Maricopa County, Arizona chain gangs are voluntary, not mandatory, and inmates choose to do them to get outside and to be able to do some work. I altered part of the article to reflect this. I also excised a major portion that had nothing to do with chain gangs and instead was a biased diatribe against conditions inside the Maricopa County jail.

Nothing Biased about it. Tent City is Shameful--up to 116 degrees in the summer; tents just get a small room-type air-conditioner. Down to 14 degrees last winter; Arpaio just gives out extra blankets. Food is same-- Sandwich 3 times a day. I'm not molly-coddling prisoners; but they deserve civil treatment. Plus, too many get arrested in AZ ("law and order c**p); many are soon released, anyway. To not arrest who's not obviously guilty is more sensible and saves expense--that could be put into building a Real Jail extension. Chain gangs are NOT VOLUNTARY! Unless, of course, you just want to stay Inside....70.176.118.196 (talk) 16:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Chain gang From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search adventist!! A chain gang of convicts going to work near Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. Dated 1842.For other uses, see Chain gang (disambiguation). A chain gang is a group of prisoners chained together to perform menial or physically challenging labor, such as chipping stone, often along a highway or railbed. This system existed primarily in the United States, and by 1955, had been phased out of use nationwide. However, some states reintroduced the chain gang system beginning in the 1990s, and nations other than the U.S. have used it in the past.

Contents [hide] 1 Synonyms and disambiguation 2 History of chain gangs 3 Reintroduction and criticisms 4 Culture 4.1 Motion pictures 4.2 Music 4.3 Dance 5 Further reading 6 External links

[edit] Synonyms and disambiguation A single ankle shackle with a short length of chain attached to a heavy ball is known as a ball and chain and was meant to limit prisoner movement and impede escape.

Two ankle shackles attached to each other by a short length of chain are known as a hobble or as leg irons. These could be chained to a much longer chain with several other prisoners, creating a work crew known as a chain gang. The walk required to avoid tripping while in leg irons is known as the convict shuffle.

A group of prisoners working outside prison walls under close supervision, but without chains, is a work gang. Their distinctive attire (stripewear or orange vests or jumpsuits) serves the purpose of displaying their punishment to the public, as well as making them easily identifiable if they attempt to escape. Whatever deterrent effect that may have on potential criminals, the lack of actual chains makes a modern work gang much safer than a traditional chain gang.

The use of chains could be extremely hazardous. Some of the chains used in the Georgia system in the first half of the twentieth century weighed twenty pounds. Some prisoners suffered from shackle sores — ulcers where the iron ground against their skin. Gangrene and other infections were serious risks. Falls could imperil several individuals at once.

Modern prisoners are sometimes put into handcuffs or wrist manacles (similar to handcuffs, but with a longer length of chain) and leg irons, with both sets of manacles (wrist and ankle) being chained to a belly chain. This form of restraint is most often used on prisoners expected to be violent, or prisoners appearing in a setting where they may be near the public (a courthouse) or have an opportunity to flee (being transferred from a prison to a court). Although prisoners in these restraints are sometimes chained to one another during transport or other movement, this is not a chain gang — although reporters may refer to it as such — because the restraints make any kind of work impossible. Prisoners restrained this way may have their hands chained so close to the waist that they cannot use a pen, or touch their own faces; they cannot work.

[edit] History of chain gangs Some claim that the putative purpose of a chain gang has been punitive. Others note that it is fair to expect criminals who cost society great expense in housing them, feeding them and keeping them from endangering the public to return some work or service in exchange for those expenditures on their behalf. Some claim that the chain gang system was a way of perpetuating African-American slavery after the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ended slavery except for persons convicted of crimes, by providing a large workforce at no cost for government projects, and at minimal convict leasing cost for private businesses. Others note that both blacks and whites were put on chain gangs and that criminals should work not only to defray the public expenditures made on their behalf but also as a form of correction. Others find that putting inmates to work is preferable to leaving them idle in cells. Still others note that those who protest against prison conditions complain on the one hand that it is cruel or unproductive to leave inmates confined in cells, yet they also complain about prisoners being put to work whether in chain gangs or otherwise.

Some claim that the display of chain gangs in public was to serve as a deterrent to crime as well as satisfy the needs of politicians to appear "tough on crime." The last of the first wave of chain gangs in the United States was shut down in 1955.[citation needed] The second wave of chain gangs began when some counties and states restored chain gangs in the 1990s.

[edit] Reintroduction and criticisms Some jurisdictions, such as Alabama and Arizona, have re-introduced the chain gang. In recent years, Maricopa County, Arizona, which is the county that covers Phoenix, Arizona, and its controversial sheriff Joe Arpaio, has drawn attention from human rights groups for its use of chain gangs for both men and women. Arizona's modern chain gangs, rather than chipping rocks or other non-productive tasks, often do real work of economic benefit to a correctional department. Opponents note that the gangs often work outside in oppressive desert heat; others note that participation in Maricopa County's chain gangs is voluntary, not mandatory, and that everyone else who does outdoor work there must do so in heat as well.

A year after reintroducing the chain gang in 1995, Alabama was forced to again abandon the practice pending a lawsuit from, among other organizations, the Southern Poverty Law Center. "They realized that chaining them together was inefficient; that it was unsafe," said attorney Richard Cohen of the organization. However, as late as 2000, Alabama Prison Commissioner, Ron Jones has again proposed reintroducing the chain gang. Like historical chain gangs, their reintroduced cousins have been compared to slavery in academic circles.[1]

[edit] Culture

[edit] Motion pictures I Am a Fugitive from a Chain Gang was an award-winning movie released in 1932, which depicted the degrading and inhumane treatment on chain gangs in the post-World War I era. O Brother, Where Art Thou? featured chain gangs. Cool Hand Luke American Chain Gang is a 1999 is documentary about male and female inmates in the recently revived prison chain gangs. Life - Starring Eddie Murphy and Martin Lawrence and features them working on a chain gang. The Last Hard Men - The beginning scene features James Coburn escaping from a chain gang. The Green Mile - This acclaimed film features brief opening shots of a chain gang during the 1930s. The Longest Yard Robin Hood (Disney)

[edit] Music Legendary soul singer Sam Cooke recorded a hit song in the 1960's called Chain Gang (also covered by Otis Redding). Back on the Chain Gang is a popular song from the Pretenders album Learning to Crawl. Work Song written by Oscar Brown, Jr, Nat Adderley and recorded by Nina Simone on the albums Forbidden Fruit (1961) and High Priestess of Soul (1967). It tells the story of someone sentenced to 5 years on a chain gang. Chain Gang was written and performed by Johnny Cash. Danish noise rock n roll duo The Raveonettes recorded an album entitled Chain Gang of Love in 2002.

[edit] Dance "Rainbow 'Round My Shoulder" is a modern dance piece choereographed by Donald McKayle about chain gangs.

[edit] Further reading Burns, Robert E. I Am a Fugitive from a Georgia Chain Gang! University of Georgia Press; Brown Thrasher Ed edition (October 1997; original copyright, late 1920's). ISBN 0820319430. Autobiography on which movie of the same name was based; best-seller responsible for exposing abuses of Southern chain gang system to national readership, leading to their termination. Colvin, Mark. Penitentiaries, Reformatories, and Chain Gangs: Social Theory and the History of Punishment in Nineteenth-Century America. Palgrave Macmillan (2000). ISBN: 0312221282. Lichtenstein, Alex. Twice the Work of Free Labor: The Political Economy of Convict Labor in the New South. Verso (1995). ISBN: 1859840868. Mancini, Matthew J. One Dies, Get Another: Convict Leasing in the American South, 1866-1928. University of South Carolina Press (1996). ISBN: 1570030839. Oshinsky, David M. Worse than Slavery: Parchman Farm and the Ordeal of Jim Crow Justice. (1997). ISBN: 0684830957. Curtin, Mary Ellen. Black Prisoners and Their World : Alabama, 1865-1900. University of Virginia Press (2000). ISBN: 0813919843

[edit] External links Movie of chain gang in Charleston, South Carolina; circa 1904 The Labour of Doing Time Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain_gang" Categories: Articles with unsourced statements since February 2007 | All articles with unsourced statements | Corporal punishments | Imprisonment and detention | Penal imprisonment | Unfree labor ViewsArticle Discussion Edit this page History Personal toolsSign in / create account Navigation Main page Contents Featured content Current events Random article interaction About Wikipedia Community portal Village pump Recent changes Contact us Make a donation Help Search Toolbox What links here Related changes Upload file Special pages Printable version Permanent link Cite this article

This page was last modified 23:52, 20 March 2007. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.) Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a US-registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers

Clallam County, Washington, USA
I just got back from visiting Clallam County, Washington, USA, the other day, and was supprised to see chain gangs in use there. They do not work chained together, but do ware chains from their legs to their waists, and do manual labour. We saw a sign stating that a section of highway had its litter collected by chain gang members, and we were woken at our campsite by chain gang members building a mountain bike trail. It caught us rather off guard. The side of the truck they were being transported in said in large official letters "Chain Gang", however this article seems to say that the practice has been eliminated in the USA. What's going on here? --Keithonearth (talk) 17:25, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to their website.--Keithonearth (talk) 21:58, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Article seems to ignore usage as a valid source for a definition
the article admits that media and others refer to prisoners who are chained together, but not working, as a chain gang, yet casts it off as if it's just wrong. Language changes and is not a science, so if media is starting to refer to inmates chained together (who are not working) as a chain gang, and the article wants to mention this fact, it should be in the sense that the definition may be changing to a new usage, not that it's just wrong. Words are always defined by how they are used, and media have a special influence on the matter. Dancindazed (talk) 04:19, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

RfC
An RfC: Which descriptor, if any, can be added in front of Southern Poverty Law Center when referenced in other articles? has been posted at the Southern Poverty Law Center talk page. Your participation is welcomed. – MrX 16:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Chain gang. 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/20120722162143/http://www.mcso.org/About/FAQ/pdf/Chain_Gangs.pdf to http://www.mcso.org/About/FAQ/pdf/Chain_Gangs.pdf

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) 01:21, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

File:A Southern chain gang c1903-restore.jpg to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:A Southern chain gang c1903-restore.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on August 25, 2017. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-08-25. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:40, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Virginia 1972
I saw a road side chain gange in southern Virginia near the North Carolina border in the summer of 1972. WhoAmIYouDoNotKnow (talk) 02:07, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Chain gangs
When I was a correctional officer in FL in the 70s, we had a few chain gangs. While I worked graveyard shift and was rarely at the prison after sunrise, sometimes I had to show up for firearms qualification, classes, riot squad training. I could observe, from the parking lot, the chain gang being marched out to work the farm that fed the inmates. We used ankle irons, no ball, not connected to each other, and armed guards. 74.40.116.36 (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chain gang


text: Category:Footballers in Wales by club

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

title: Category:Footballers in Wales by club


text: Category:Football managers in Wales by club


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BlabberMouth PR

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — J I P | Talk 11:48, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

BlabberMouth PR
Advertising. Created by User:Blabbermouthpr. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:06, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete very much an ad Qaz  ( talk ) 23:33, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete ad for a company that's not notable anyway. --W.marsh 00:04, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Apyule 08:03, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, promotion. feydey 11:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Talk:White Americans

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2024
The wiki text below, is outdated, and doesn't match any of the census data, nor is it a valid metric as it is a voluntary community survey used by only 80 million people. This does not match the current US Census data. Here is the current data and link: English 12.5% (mixed ancestry white 19.8%) German 7.6% (19.1%) Irish 5.3% (16.4%) Italian 3.2% (7.1%) Polish 1.3% (3.7) French 0.8% (3.4%) Scottish 0.7% (3.6%) https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/interactive/detailed-race-ethnicities-2020-census.html

Below is the inaccurate data:

The most commonly reported ancestries of non-Hispanic White Americans include German (13%), Irish (10%), English (9%), Italian (6%), French (4%), Polish (3%), Scottish (3%), Scotch-Irish (2%), and Dutch, Norwegian, Swedish, and Russian (each 1%), respectively. AmericanDemographics (talk) 10:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 22:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2024
Add White trash to see also section. 2600:6C50:7EF0:71E0:850:28DB:D2EE:6D8E (talk) 07:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ * Pppery * it has begun... 22:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:White Americans


text:
Talk:Harry M. Daugherty

Untitled
The Blackstone, not the Palmer House, was the supposed meeting place for the smoke-filled room. See: http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/3217.html --Our Bold Hero 23:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Harry Daughtery was of Scotch-Irish descent. The name was pronounced Dok-er-ty

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_do_you_pronounce_Dochartaigh Rick0427 (talk) 02:32, 6 August 2009 (UTC) see: The Shadow Of Blooming Grove by Francis Russell page 109 copyright 1968 McGraw-Hill —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick0427 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

alot of the material in the Ohio Gang section is also found elsewhere on Wikipedia
The section The "Ohio Gang" contains a lot of material that is redundantly covered in Warren G. Harding and The Teapot Dome scandal. It would be nice if somebody could help eliminate the redundancies in Wikipedia here and also transpose some of the material about Daugherty from Warren G. Harding to this page. makeswell (talk) 20:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Speculation of the relationship between Harry Daugherty and Jess Smith
Jess Smith held no formal position in the federal government. He simply served as an unofficial assistant to Daugherty. Smith lived with Daugherty at the Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, DC, and it was rumored, at the time, that the two men were engaged in a homosexual relationship. Smith was single, while Daugherty was married. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DeRoyddrick (talk • contribs) 03:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Harry M. Daugherty. 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/20150924090031/http://www.remarkableohio.org/HistoricalMarker.aspx?historicalMarkerId=874 to http://www.remarkableohio.org/HistoricalMarker.aspx?historicalMarkerId=874
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120722062621/http://web2.ohiohistory.org/ipac20/ipac.jsp?index=CNTRLEX&profile=allsoc&term=6051033 to http://web2.ohiohistory.org/ipac20/ipac.jsp?index=CNTRLEX&profile=allsoc&term=6051033

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:00, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Harry M. Daugherty


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/ArmchairVexillologistDon

Apologies in advance. This is the first time I've had to use "Requents for comment." I am trying to follow the guidelines, but may inadvertently make mistakes along the way. If I've made a mistake, I'd appreciate it if someone could offer guidance.

Description
The problem is twofold: (1) ArmchairVexillologistDon has been making comments that clearly violate the Wikipedia policy on civility, and (2) he has been using the Talk pages as a chat group, posting long, irrelevant passages and engaging in debates on issues not directly related to the relevant article.

Evidence of disputed behavior
Evidence of point (1) violating policy on civility:
 * "Homey, first off Wikipedia is not a Court of Law, so can the Lawyer-speak crap, ok. Everything for you is some damn legal arguement. For once just one, please do not take yourself so seriously. Next up, you would a made a shitty lawyer."

 * "Listen HistoryBA, I do not appreciate your needless editing my words on this talkpage. Frankly you are being quite petty. This is a talkpage, not an article. Contributions to articles need to be carefully reviewed, and if needs be edited. Frankly, I will drop this, as you are not worth the trouble. Be warned HistoryBA, you have needlessly pissed me off, and frankly I am now suspicious that you might in fact be someones sock-puppet and/or collaborator."

 * "Excuse me? You just can not leave well enough alone. You've got mental problems. Big ones."

 * "My opinion of your "analytical thinking abilities" is quite low indeed. Again, get the *bleep* off my talkpage, you are not welcome here. "

 * "You are the one who looks like the psycho idiot."

 * "You have no call to lecture me on "internet-ettiquette", that is for damn sure. Frankly, I can not stand your guts."

 * "You framed that stupid arguement, not me. Save your condecension for someone would actually listens to your bluster.... You have absolutely no clue about this subject do you. Holy-crap."

 * "...get the hell off my talkpage, you are not welcome here."

He was asked, and has explicitly refused, to withdraw or apologize for some of these remarks. See

Evidence of point (2) posting irrelevant material on the Talk pages (or lengthy passages that are only partly relevant):

 *
 *
 *
 *
 *
 *
 * There are many others on the Talk:Canada page and the Talk:Canada's name page. I will provide the links if others think it necessary.

Applicable policies

 * Civility
 * Writers_rules_of_engagement
 * What_Wikipedia_is_not
 * Wikiquette
 * Talk_page_guidelines

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
These issues have been raised by at least two editors on his talk page:

User:Saxifrage:
 *
 *
 *

User:HistoryBA:
 *

User:Homey:
 *

Users certifying the basis for this dispute
(sign with ~ )

 * HistoryBA 02:06, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * JimWae 04:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Ground Zero | t 16:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary
(sign with ~ )
 * — Phil Welch 07:48, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Zach (Sound Off) 04:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * User:Homey 17:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * CJCurrie 21:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Ca-on-sb.gif|20px|Flag of Scarborough, ON, Canada]] UTSRelativity (Talk) 22:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Bearcat 03:44, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Zhatt 17:52, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Andrew pmk | Talk 23:13, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Outside view by McClenon
I have not bothered to check the diffs and links. However, I find ArmchairVexillologistDon's response to be troubling because he never addresses the substantive allegations of incivility. There are numerous examples posted of what are clearly very uncivil posts. His reply appears to say more about the certifiers and endorsers than about the substance of the complaint, which is that he has been uncivil. I would like to suggest some way of resolving this. Unfortunately, ArmchairVexillologistDon does not appear to be showing any interest in resolving this dispute.

 * Hello Robert McClenon,

 * The page that you were originally pointed to is an imcomplete dead-end, with regards to the full fact of the ArbComm Case field against me by Homey, which he later withdrew. Here is the full accounting of the process,

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/ArmchairVexillologistDon/Proposed_decision#Limited_ban_on_ArmchairVexillologistDon

 * Salient Points,

 * (i). SlimVirgin was an honest broker of a deal between Homey and I,

 * (ii). Homey formally withdrew the ArbComm Case (Sept. 3, 2005),

 * (iii). the ArbComm has registered 5 Votes (only 4 required) to formally close the ArbComm case (from Sept. 17 to Sept. 24, 2005),

 * (iv). the 4th Vote was cast on Sept. 20, 2005 (ans thus the techincal closing date).

 * As per your observation that I have not directly addressed the "substance of the complaint of in-civility" filed against me, well experience here has taught me that silence is prudent in offical matters, I just present the facts.

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 15:08, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

A Request for Arbitration was previously filed against this editor, and was then closed, partly because it appeared that AVD had stopped editing. If he is editing again, then the ArbCom can be petitioned to reopen the dispute and take into account all of the evidence that was previously accepted and any new evidence.
 * 1) Robert McClenon 11:58, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Addendum
I see that ArmchairVexillologistDon has "coloured outside the lines" by editing my comments, while officially declining to comment on the RfC itself. I consider this to be a bad-faith response to the RfC. If the ArbCom reopens the case, I will submit the bad-faith altering of my response as evidence. Robert McClenon 00:22, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Sadly, I think, this has to be sent to ArbCom again. Zach (Sound Off) 01:04, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

by Zscout370
FWIW, there was a WP:RFAr case against AVD that was recently closed: Requests_for_arbitration/ArmchairVexillologistDon. Zach (Sound Off) 05:09, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The link above is an imcomplete dead-end with regard to the ArbComm Case filed against me by Homey, and later withdrawn (Sept. 3, 2005)

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/ArmchairVexillologistDon/Proposed_decision#Limited_ban_on_ArmchairVexillologistDon

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 15:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I suggest petitioning the ArbCom to re-open the case. --Carnildo 06:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It was recently closed because the original petitioner, with an agreement by SlimVirgin and AVD, closed the case. If you want, I can contact SlimVirgin and see what happens now. Zach (Sound Off) 06:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SlimVirgin#RfC_against_AVD. Zach (Sound Off) 06:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Personally, I think it would be a good thing if you were to contact SlimVirgin and inquire about this matter. HistoryBA 01:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I already did so above, but I am not sure what she will say. Zach (Sound Off) 01:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Zscout370 posted this,

 * RfC against AVD
 * I noticed at the RFAr page against this user, you was able to get into a agreement with AVD and another user to stop the RFAr. I wish to tell you that a RFC has been filed against AVD and it is pretty much over the same stuff, except with a different user. It can be seen at Requests for comment/ArmchairVexillologistDon. Zach (Sound Off) 06:52, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 07:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * AVD, I mainly posted that message to SlimVirgin's talk page, since she hashed out an agreement with you and the person that filed the RFAr against you. I have nothing to do with the filing of this RFAr, I am just making a comment and playing messenger boy. Zach (Sound Off) 07:40, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Hello Zscout370,

Could you please explain to me what is the difference between an RfC (Request for Comment), and an RfAr (Request for Arbitration). Oh yaa, which one is this one, again? 'Cause it feels like an RfAr (not an RfC).

Take care, and best wishes,

ArmchairVexillologistDon 16:10, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * A request for comment allows for other users to come in and try to solve an issue and propose solutions. However, a RFAr usually gets into issues of who will be banned for how long. While this is supposed to be a process where no "blocking penalties" are supposed to be issued, some have commented towards me and others that the RFC process is "just a waiting room for RFAr." But, the proper procedure was followed here and I personally feel that those who were seeing this RFC should know about the recent closing of the ArbCom case. Zach (Sound Off) 16:56, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Hello Zscout370,

Thanks alot for explaining that to me, I appreciate it very much. You have made me feel a little bit better, about this whole situation, and I thank you for that.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 17:13, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Your welcome. What I very strongly suggest is look at the accusations in both places and try to modify the behavior as much as possible, since that is what the ultimate goal is: to make you a better contributor. But what I also noticed is that you like to edit pages related to Canada and flags. Since I have worked with you before with some success, what I like to propose to you. There is a group called WP:TINMC, they provide for a mediation/mentoring to take place. If you want, we can have it arranged that I could mentor you and try to help you become a better editor. Zach (Sound Off) 17:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

by E Pluribus Anthony

 * (First of all, I'm unsure if this is in the right spot; please move appropriately, if applicable.)

I would like to belatedly comment regarding this situation, for what it's worth. My position harks that of User:Saxifrage. Over the last long while, I have observed many repeated, constant violations of Wikipedia norms of behaviour and conduct by AVD. Particularly: name calling, taunting, and personal attacks are among actions that are clearly unacceptable in any form, et al.

However, beyond having to read through reams of apparently inchoate text lifted verbatim, in toto from numerous sources without elaboration (itself a breach of conduct), I have not personally experienced any negative behaviour from AVD. In his defence (and not in support of his conduct), I have also noticed behaviour by various users that could be perceived as being antagonistic and (colloquially) adding fuel to the fire.

I have also been (and am) involved in discussion's regarding Canada's name, et al. and have incessantly attempted to walk a fine line, but to also present authoritative information accurately either way. One of AVD's intentions, I believe, was to reiterate text as much as possible so that varying user interpretation could not apparently obfuscate the issue ... often having the reverse effect. Moreover in some of these discussions, there have been fewer instances of substantiation from various parties than are desirable for such topics and AVD apparently perceived some user commentaries as being deprecating or militant (also having the reverse effect).

It is my distinct hope that collaboration and the use of tactful diplomacy will morph AVD (or any user) into being a positive contributing Wikipedian. It is regrettable that he, thus far, is unwilling or unable to change his behaviour with regard to others, not to me per se, but I acknowledge why administrative/corrective actions are necessary. Thoughts? In any event, thanks for your time. E Pluribus Anthony 01:23, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

AVD's summary of the "Evidence of disputed behavior"
It has been posted above by HistoryBA that,

Evidence of point (1) violating policy on civility:

 * Posted to Homey(6 Cited posts).

 * (Subject: Canada's name, speaking like a Lawyer over me expressing my suspicion that HistoryBA might be a sock-puppet.).

 * (1). "Homey, first off Wikipedia is not a Court of Law, so can the Lawyer-speak crap, ok. Everything for you is some damn legal arguement. For once just one, please do not take yourself so seriously. Next up, you would a made a shitty lawyer."

 * (Subject: Canada's name, putting words in my mouth about the origin of the word "Realme").

 * (2). "Excuse me? You just can not leave well enough alone. You've got mental problems. Big ones."

 * (Subject: Harrassment on my own Talkpage).

 * (3). "My opinion of your "analytical thinking abilities" is quite low indeed. Again, get the *bleep* off my talkpage, you are not welcome here. "

 * (Subject: Old quotation.  Dealt with in ArbComm case that was dropped by Homey).

 * (4). "You are the one who looks like the psycho idiot."

 * (Subject: Old quotation.  Dealt with in ArbComm case that was dropped by Homey).

 * (5). "You have no call to lecture me on "internet-ettiquette", that is for damn sure. Frankly, I can not stand your guts."

 * (Subject: Harrassment on my own Talkpage).

 * (6). "...get the hell off my talkpage, you are not welcome here."

 * Posted to HistoryBA (1 Cited Post).

 * (Subject: Incessant deletion of this link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Ensigns )

 * (7). "Listen HistoryBA, I do not appreciate your needless editing my words on this talkpage. Frankly you are being quite petty. This is a talkpage, not an article. Contributions to articles need to be carefully reviewed, and if needs be edited. Frankly, I will drop this, as you are not worth the trouble. Be warned HistoryBA, you have needlessly pissed me off, and frankly I am now suspicious that you might in fact be someones sock-puppet and/or collaborator."

 * Posted to Ground Zero (1 Cited Post).

 * (Subject: the Republic of Ireland vs. Eire name)

 * (8). "You framed that stupid arguement, not me. Save your condecension for someone would actually listens to your bluster.... You have absolutely no clue about this subject do you. Holy-crap."

HistoryBA, (after me openly telling him that I was suspicious that he could be a sock-puppet, due to him constantly deleting this link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Ensigns, which was only on a talkpage, not an article page), has filled this complaint about me.

HistoryBA has cited 6 posts to Homey, 1 post to himself, and 1 to Ground Zero. First of all, why is HistoryBA only quoting 1 offending post to himself, yet 6 offending posts to Homey? This is very curious.

Next, HistoryBA has cited 2 OLD POSTS that well dealt with by my ArbComm case that Homey filed against me, then later dropped.

All in all, HistoryBA makes a very pecular choice of things to cite, and to bring in peripheral discussions that I had with Saxifrage. These discussions with Saxifrage where not hostile, he was just offering me advise.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 08:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion

 * AVD, there is no requirement for somone to cite comments only made about themselves. The issue is whether you've acted in an uncivil manner, not whether you've acted in an uncivil manner against HistoryBA. You should address the issue of your alleged incivility, not nitpick in regards to who your uncivil comments were directed at. User:Homey 21:51, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 "Do not nit-pick?" This coming from you?  You are the "rules-lawyer" King Nit-picker. Frankly, this whole thing seems a bit "odd". HistoryBA asks you to "second" his formal DfC submission. He does not need specifically you, all it requires is one other user. I shall sit and wait to see what happens. Homey you are too skilled a manipulator/orchestrator here at Wikipedia. In this formal page, I shall just state the facts, and see what unfolds. My experience with you in formal "trial-like" settings has taught me better. The less I say, the less that you can skillfully twist my words. You are a pro at that.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 00:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Do you want me to certify the RFC, AVD? Since you seem to have deluded yourself into thinking that HistoryBA is my sock puppet it seems I'm not accomplishing anything by *not* certifying this RFC in hopes that you'll realise that I'm not the only one who thinks you need to mend your behaviour. User:Homey 00:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

You see Homey. You are the master of the "non-win scenario". I don't respond to you, and I look bad. I do respond to you and you twist it towards "the ends" that you had already intended.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 01:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, if I do certify the RFC you can, if you really believe that HistoryBA is my sockpuppet, complain that the RFC isn't properly certified. Then we can get a developer to compare our edit histories and IP logs and declare, officially, that he is not a sockpuppet and we're different people and at the very least you'll be denied that rationalization and perhaps you'll even apologise for your slur. Perhaps you'll also learn that your habit of smearing people has negative consequences for you and you'll think twice before doing it again. User:Homey 01:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Homey, my opinion is that you seem more outraged about my expressed suspicion that HistoryBA could a sock-puppet, than HistoryBA himself. Frankly, I find your "level of concern" about this very "odd".

ArmchairVexillologistDon 03:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Drop the insinuation, AVD. I am annoyed because you've been implying that HistoryBA is my sock puppet but have declined to just come out and say so or otherwise put your money where your mouth is. Either withdraw your accusation against HistoryBA (and by extension, myself) or file a complaint. At the moment you're trying to have the best of both worlds, ie smear people you have difficulty with without actually taking responsibility for your smear and facing up to the consequences of being wrong. You've made insinuations about people before and, frankly, its contemptable behaviour not worthy of a wikipedia editor.User:Homey 17:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * It's only a "no-win scenario" if you admit that your accusation against HistoryBA is a lie. Otherwise, you have nothing to lose. Indeed, why don't you file an RFA against HistoryBA and myself accusing us of being sockpuppets (his mine, or mine his)? Since sock puppets aren't allowed to participate in Talk discussions that the "puppeteer" is also participating in you can get us both disciplined. That is, of course, if you actually believe your false claim and are not just throwing it out as a smokescreen. So that's your choice, AVD, either apologise to HistoryBA for your slur against him (and your insinuation against me) or actually show the courage of your convictions and take action with the risk that you'll be shown to be wrong and a reckless slanderer with no credibility. Your choice. User:Homey 01:25, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Homey, this is Wikipedia, it is not Court of Law. I find your constant use of legal terms, and "prosecutors-attitude" very tiresome. Everything is NOT a legal proceeding. You take yourself way to seriously. Indeed.

ArmchairVexillologistDon 03:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * So does this mean you're not willing to apologise to HistoryBA?User:Homey 17:25, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Apologise for what? I expressed my suspicion that HistoryBA could be a sock-puppet. Somehow this is such a grave hanging-offense,' that History BA files this RfC, cites 8 quotes (6 of which relates to you), then does not bother to "protest this fatal-insult" very much, but oh no, YOU are here constantly.  You seem much more insensed by my "possible-sockpuppet" comment than HistoryBA himself.

Frankly, my opinion of you Homey is "very low", and I find your incessant harrassment of me very distasteful. Alas, there is nothing I can do about it. Know this Homey, no matter how much you try and harrass and bully me, you will not be able to push me out of Wikipedia. On things that you clearly have "the mob" behind you, I shall just have to tolerate. On things that you don't (and that I am interested in) I shall try and contribute to.

'So why do YOU spend more time in here talking, than HistoryBA?''. After all HistoryBA is the one that filed this.'''

ArmchairVexillologistDon 17:36, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * This is going around in circles. You are refusing to take responsibility for your behaviour or your statements yet you continue to repeat them. If you are challenged on your statements you respond with evasion or incredulity that people are taking them "seriously". Anyway, as there are numerous editors who have issue with you I'll clear out and leave it to them. User:Homey 17:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Homey, you find this going in circles because I am not letting you "pin-me-down". I know better after being harrassed by you on a constant basis.  Of course I am responsible for my own actions, and you are responsible for yours.  Just as everyone else here is ultmately responsible for their own actions.  That is self-evident.  What is the real issue here is the actual circumstances of what lead me to react this way.  The "ownership" of that portion of these evidents is not entirely my own.  You have "some ownership" is this mess as well.  But of course you would never "see it" that way.  So yaa my impression of talking to you, is quite similar of your impression of talking to me (i.e., "the going in circles").

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 18:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

AVD's behaviour has been a chronic problem on a few significant pages. I have long held out hope that he could be brought around to behave in the Wikipedia way, and occasionally, he has seemed to temporarily agree to the need for civility and respect for other editors, but alas, he seems always to revert to his blustering and uncivil ways. I see no choice but to to follow this and any other necesary steps to make him realize that it is his behaviour that is is the problem here, and not the unreasonableness of almost all of the other editors he encounters. Ground Zero | t 16:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Hello Ground Zero,

 * Almost All of the Editors that he encounters? You certainly have a flair for the dramatic.

 * My interaction with Homey

 * (i). Our dispute started with him trying to link the old Canadian Red Ensign to Racists (by the way Homey has not touched Astrotrain's edit, but mine where always obliterated).

 * (ii). He came to an outside website, and used multiple user accounts to troll and threatened me with legal action.

 * (iii). He intiated and successfully completed a VfD of my Canadian French Tricolour form of the Maple Leaf Flag page in about 2 hours.  That must a Wikipedia record.

 * (iv). He dogs almost every contribution I try to make here.

 * I find that I have little or no defense against his continual harrassment, so yaa I am a bit "edgy".

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 17:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

This isn't just about you and Homey. It is about you and several other editors. You seem to treat many people with disrespect. I have certainly been on the receiving end of a lot of your abuse. I admit that at times I have not been as civil as I should be, and I apologized when I crossed the line. You do not seem to be willing to do that even when it is pointed out to you by third parties that you have violated Wikipedia etiquette. Ground Zero | t 18:29, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Ground Zero, both of us have a belligerent side. Mine is mainly triggered when I feel that I am being talked down to.  You have a much more disciplined, mature way of managing yours than I do.  The comment that I refused to apologise for was "the French-Canadian Bureaucrat that only submitted Canada as the local short form name", on the CIA Factbook.  I still feel that way, so I will not withdraw it.  I also feel that the Republican Irish position on the name of their country being Eire, but the description of their country as the Republic of Ireland, is hypocritical hair-splitting.

 * You always know where you stand with me. I do not lye to you Ground Zero.

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 19:04, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

My adivce to you, Don
Don, you're being unnecessarily hostile to people here. I know it's easy to see this as an attack, but it isn't. A Request for Comment is a forum for people to comment on what two or more editors have identified as an "issue" with an other editor.

You're already disagreeing with me, I know, but hear me out before you decide. There are two goals to an RfC, one for each party. The goal of the original filers is to have the issue(s) with which they are concerned addressed to the satisfaction of a consensus of commentors. The goal of the editor being commented on (you) is to show two things: 1) that their concern is unfounded, and 2) that their concerns are being taken seriously. (Note that defending past behaviour is not a goal, since attempts at doing that are always futile without the support of other editors who speak in your defence.)

Let's focus on your goals as the subject of this RfC. Consider how your defensive reaction impacts those last two points. When you are defensive, you confirm that their fear that you will not listen to their concerns is supported. In this particular case, since it is about how you interact with other editors, it also shows that their concerns are well founded.

Now, this is ironic. You are angry and annoyed that people would think these things of you, and so you act angry and annoyed. In turn, they take this as crystal-clear evidence that you are, in fact, guilty of these things they're worried about.

So, my advice to you: treat everyone here as if they have your best interests at heart, and hear everything said as a fear that someone has. Then, lay that fear to rest in a gentle manner, showing that not only are they wrong, but you are actually acting in the opposite manner to their fear. Your past history will be brought up, but let it pass. Your current behaviour is always the clincher in how someone thinks of you. Remember that, and don't let the desire to defend your past Talk history interfere with your current desire to be accepted as a worthy peer.

I know you can do this, because you've shown remarkable improvements in your approach to other editors since your work at Canada's name turned out in an unexpected way for you. Most of the diffs cited above on your behaviour are from before this turnabout on your part, which is why I can't endorse this RfC's summary in good faith. However, as this advice makes plain, I do strongly feel that you need to rethink how you deal with editors who have a problem with you, because so far your technique only makes you seem as bad as they already think you are, not better. — Saxifrage | ☎ 03:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Hello Saxifrage,

 * Thank you for your kind words, and your kind advice. I appreciate them very much.  You have given me alot of "food-for-thought", and I shall take your sage words to heart.  Yes, I have a belligerent side.  When I feel talked down to, "it" unfortunately can come out.  I do not like that part of me, and I have tried to contain it as much as possible, all my life.  Sometimes, in here "the old triggers" pop-up and Mr. Hyde, to my Dr. Jekyl side comes out in full view.  I shall try doubly hard to keep Mr. Hyde boxed up.

 * A case in point, I recently started an article called the French Ensigns. This is a little known, but very interesting Flag topic. The Colonial Possessions of France had a series of Ensigns that directly mirrored the British ensigns of the British Commonwealth-Empire.  Finally after a mini edit-war (yes again!), with Homey, he has made a comprimise, and left something that I wrote partially intact, instead of the usual complete obliteration.

 * In closing, thank you for showing me some trust and acceptance here at Wikipedia, Saxifrage. I appreciate that alot.

 * By the way, do you know were I might be able to get ahold of a pre-1790 (French Revolution) French dictionary? I am trying to trace the origin/evolution of the word Realme (Realme, to reialme, to reiame, to roiame, to Royaume).  Thanks.

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 03:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm glad I can help. My time here has taught me a lot about my own tendencies to take offense and respond hotly, so I know where you're coming from and I know how much of a struggle it can be. It's also very hard to admit, so kudos on that. If you can recall these thoughts every time you find yourself wanting to write something angry, you'll already be a long way to changing the habits you don't like. — Saxifrage | ☎ 04:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again Saxifrage, for the understanding, and the kind advice. I appreciate it alot. I will try hard to remember your advice when I am in "a situation" again ("Count to 10 Don, 1 ... 2 ... 3 ... 4 .... BOOM! Just kidding.)

Take care, and best wishes,

ArmchairVexillologistDon 05:10, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Continung to use talk pages as chat rooms
Despite this RfC being posted on October 3, Don again posted (on October 8) a long message on Talk:Canada's name about an off-hand remark I made about seven months ago in reference to a possible future way of selecting a head-of-state. This does not contribute to the discussion of what Canada's official name is now. Don continues to show a lack of respect for Wikipedia's codes of behaviour or for other editors. Ground Zero | t 11:12, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

So ban me then

 * Ground Zero,

 * I moved "it" to my Talkpage

 * Ground Zero: The Electorate of Canada

 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ArmchairVexillologistDon

 * If you don't like that, well why don't you initiate my banning from Wikipedia. I am tired of your condescending attitude.  Ban me then, you jerk.

 * ArmchairVexillologistDon 20:31, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Because of this personal attack, I have blocked Don indefinitely from Wikipedia. Zach (Sound Off) 20:40, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't think calling someone a "jerk" is severe enough to justify an indefinite unilateral ban. An RFA would be the appropriate route - the ArbComm can look at AVD's behaviour (ie personal attacks etc) and determine the level and length of punishment. User:Homey 21:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I would be inclined to agree with you, Homey, except that Don has shown here that he is repeatedly and knowingly violating Wikipedia policies on personal attacks and using talk pages as chat rooms. This is not a one-off thing. He just keeps doing it over and over. And he refuses to apologize even when the WP:NPA policy is pointed out to him. I have tried repeatedly, as you can see from my earlier interactions with Don, and even from some of my later ones, to get him to accept the Wikipedia way of doing things and of treating other people. And he repeatedly violates these policies. (And then blames others for his actions -- "You idiots have driven me to this sort of behaviour".) I think he has been giving far more opportunities to play nicely than he would be anywhere, which is a good thing about Wikipedia, but there comes a time for "tough love". The gentle approach has been proven not to work with this guy. I have given up on the idea that he can be turned from a rude and offensive POV-pusher into a productive member of the community. Ground Zero | t 22:55, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Saying "go ahead, ban me" to an admin is about as bright as saying "shoot me" to a cop. Nevertheless, the ArbComm is there for a reason. At the very least, the ArbComm should be advised that AVD has been indefinitely banned and why so that they can review the matter if they see fit. Leaving a message on User:Fred Bauder's talk page should suffice. User:Homey 23:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Done, . Zach (Sound Off) 23:05, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

RFAr
I am letting you know that I have filed Requests_for_arbitration. Zach (Sound Off) 08:41, 9 October 2005 (UTC)


text: Category:Communications in Belize

title: Category:Communications in Belize


text:
Trench raiding

Trench raiding was a feature of trench warfare which developed during World War I. It was the practice of making small scale night-time surprise attacks on enemy positions.

Overview
Typically, raids were carried out by small teams of men who would black up their faces with burnt cork before crossing the barbed wire and other debris of no man's land to infiltrate enemy trench systems. The distance between friendly and enemy front lines varied but was generally several hundred metres. Any attempt to raid a trench during daylight hours would have been pointless because it would have been quickly spotted: enemy machine gunners and snipers had a clear view of no man's land and could easily shoot anyone who showed their head above the trench parapet.

Standard practice was to creep slowly up on the sentries guarding a small sector of an enemy front line trench (looking for the glow of cigarettes in the dark or listening for conversations) then kill them as quietly as possible. Having secured the trench, the raiders would complete their mission objectives as quickly as possible, ideally within several minutes. Raiders were aware that the longer they stayed in the trench, the greater the likelihood of enemy reinforcements arriving. Grenades would be thrown into dugouts where enemy troops were sleeping before the raiders left the enemy lines to return to their own.

There was always a risk that returning raiders could be shot in so-called friendly fire incidents. Therefore, it was standard procedure to notify sentries along the line whenever raiding parties were sent out, and to use some form of password system so that returning raiders could identify themselves when challenged in the dark.

Purpose
Trench raiding had multiple purposes. Typically, the intention would be one or more of the following:

 * Capture, wound or kill enemy troops
 * Destroy, disable or capture high value equipment e.g. machine guns such as the MG08
 * Gather intelligence by seizing important documents (e.g. maps) or enemy officers for interrogation
 * Reconnaissance for a future massed attack during daylight hours
 * Keep the enemy feeling under threat during the hours of darkness, thereby reducing their efficiency and morale
 * Maintain aggressiveness and fighting spirit in the troops by sending them on such missions

Weapons
Despite the fact that World War I was the first conflict to be fought by mechanized means, trench raiding was very similar to medieval warfare insofar as it was fought face-to-face with crude weaponry. Trench raiders were lightly equipped for stealthy, unimpeded movement. Typically, raiding parties were armed with deadly homemade trench raiding clubs, machetes, bayonets, entrenching tools, trench knives, hammers, hatchets, pickaxe handles and brass knuckles. The choice of weaponry was deliberate: the raiders' intention was to kill or capture people quietly, without drawing attention to their activities. Clearly, this would have been impossible if they had routinely used firearms during raids. Trench raiders were also armed with more modern weapons such as pistols, shotguns, submachine guns, and hand grenades, though these were only intended to be used in an emergency i.e. if the enemy discovered their activities and raised the alarm.

title: Trench raiding


text:
Category:Cardiff City F.C. players

The following lists Cardiff City Football Club players past and present.

title: Category:Cardiff City F.C. players


text:
Video Watchdog

Video Watchdog was a bimonthly, digest size film magazine published from 1990 to 2017 by publisher/editor Tim Lucas and his wife, art director and co-publisher Donna Lucas.

Although devoted chiefly to the horror, science fiction, and fantasy genres, the magazine frequently delved beyond these strictures into art film, Hong Kong action cinema, Spaghetti Western, exploitation films, anime, and general mainstream cinema. In addition to Lucas himself, Video Watchdog's list of regular contributors included such writers as Kim Newman, Stephen R. Bissette, associate editor John Charles, Bill Cooke and Heather Drain. Regular columns included "Ramsey's Rambles" by Ramsey Campbell and "Fleapit Flashbacks" by Joe Dante. Douglas E. Winter contributed a CD/music column, "Audio Watchdog," while books were reviewed in "Biblio Watchdog" by Lucas, Anthony Ambrogio and Brett Taylor.

Publication history
Originally a black-and-white publication, Video Watchdog was founded in 1990. The magazine added full-color covers with its 13th issue, and celebrated its 100th issue in 2003 by adopting a permanent, full-color format. Los Angeles-based artist Charlie Largent was responsible for most of the cover art from 2002 to the penultimate issue in 2016, beginning with #84. Two Video Watchdog Special Editions were also published, as well as two Video Watchdog Signature Editions, the latter featuring unique covers individually signed by child stars Donnie Dunagan and Ann Carter. The magazine's website included "Round Table" film discussions, free article samples, and a link to Lucas' "Video WatchBlog", launched in October 2005.

On October 24, 2016, it was announced that the magazine would cease print publication. Days later, those who had paid for subscriptions and other creditors received notice that the magazine had filed for Chapter 7 Bankruptcy. A surprise final issue, #184, was mailed to subscribers in June, 2017 as a farewell gesture and was later made available to the general public in limited quantities via the Video Watchdog website.

Related publications
As a company, Video Watchdog also published two books written by editor Lucas. The Video Watchdog Book, released September 1992, is a collection of articles, essays, and lists that originated in other magazines, including Film Comment and Fangoria. Mario Bava All the Colors of the Dark, published September 2007, is a copiously illustrated, 1128-page critical biography of Italian director and cinematographer Mario Bava. It received a Rondo Hatton Classic Horror Award as the Best Book of 2007, as well as an Independent Publishers Award bronze medal and a Saturn Award for Special Achievement.

Awards

 * Best Magazine - Rondo Classic Horror Award 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006.
 * Best Website - Rondo Classic Horror Award 2006.
 * Best Theme Issue (#169, Dark Shadows) - Rondo Classic Horror Award 2012.
 * Best Semi-Prozine - FanEx Award, 1991.

title: Video Watchdog


text:
Therm-a-Rest

Therm-a-Rest is an American outdoor product company specializing in camping mattresses, sleeping bags, camp chairs, cots, and pillows. Therm-a-Rest began as a line of self-inflating camping mattresses, invented in the early-1970s by two former Boeing engineers and avid backpackers. The company was initially named Cascade Designs, which is now the parent company of Therm-a-Rest and other outdoor brands.

Product
A Therm-a-Rest self-inflating mattress consists of an airtight nylon fabric envelope filled with a sheet of low density, open-cell polyurethane foam. When a valve is opened the foam expands and draws air into the mattress. When the mattress has fully inflated, the user simply closes the valve. To increase firmness a few breaths of air can be blown into the mattress. To pack the mattress the valve is opened and it is rolled up tightly to force the air out, whereupon the valve is closed to prevent re-inflation.

title: Therm-a-Rest


text:
Talk:The effects of catalysts on hydrogen peroxide

original version
''they react immediately, it bubbles up in a big froth depending on how much or what source of catalayse you use. if you have to do an experiment to work out how much catalayse an chemical contains add approximately 20ml of hydrogen peroxide and the food source and watch the results, i had to do this in Biology and it is great just make sure you are good at jumping back quickly.''

I rewrote it to be mor formal. The title is still problematic (but at least it now spells catalyst correctly). Since I made a major change to it I decline to be the person to remove the cleanup tag. RJFJR 23:11, 2 October 2005 (UTC)


text: Category:Cardiff City F.C. managers

title: Category:Cardiff City F.C. managers


text:
HMLA-367

Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron 367 (HMLA-367) is a United States Marine Corps helicopter squadron consisting of AH-1Z Viper attack helicopters and UH-1Y Venom utility helicopters. Originally commissioned during World War II, the squadron participated in combat operations on Peleliu and Okinawa. Reactivated during the Vietnam War, the squadron has served during numerous conflicts since. The squadron is based at Marine Corps Air Station Camp Pendleton, California and falls under the command of Marine Aircraft Group 39 (MAG-39) and the 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing (3rd MAW).

Mission
The mission of HMLA-367 is to support the Marine Air-Ground Task Force (MAGTF) Commander by providing offensive air support, utility support, armed escort and airborne supporting arms coordination, day or night, under all weather conditions during expeditionary, joint, or combined operations.

World War II
Artillery Spotting Division, Marine Observation Squadron 351 (ASD(VMO-351)) was commissioned on 1 December 1943 at Marine Corps Base Quantico, Virginia. On 15 January 1944, the squadron was re-designated as Marine Observation Squadron 3 (VMO-3) while preparing to deploy overseas. During February 1944, VMO-3 departed San Diego and arrived at Espiritu Santo on 4 March 1944. The squadron spent the next few months in the Russell Islands continuing to train. On 17 September 1944, the forward echelon of VMO-3 landed on Peleliu Airfield, two days after the initial invasion. The squadron supported operations on Peleliu and on 28 September it also supported the assault on Ngesebus. On 22 October 1944 VMO-3 departed Peleliu for the Russell Islands to begin training with III Marine Amphibious Corps artillery. On 10 March 1945, VMO-3 sailed for Ulithi where it transferred to escort carriers for movement to Okinawa. On 3 April 1945, two OY-1 Grasshoppers from VMO-3 landed on Yontan Airfield. These were the first American planes to land on the island. The squadron commenced operations from Yontan the following day immediately supporting four artillery battalions. By 11 April, VMO-3 was supporting eleven artillery batteries ashore.

Following the surrender of Japan, VMO-3 departed for Northern China in September 1945. On 10 October, the USS Bougainville (CVE-100) arrived at the Taku Forts, and disembarked VMO-3, which was tasked to support the 3rd Marines. The squadron participated in the occupation of North China from October 1945 through June 1947. VMO-3 relocated to Guam in July 1947 and moved again in May 1949 to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point, North Carolina being assigned to the 2nd Marine Aircraft Wing. The squadron was decommissioned on 20 August 1949.

Vietnam War
As the United States increased its presence in the South Vietnam, the Marine Corps reactivated VMO-3 at Marine Corps Air Station Camp Pendleton on 1 August 1966 and assigned it to Marine Wing Support Group 37. The squadron arrived in Vietnam in December 1966 and were now flying the UH-1E. VMO-3 became fully operational at Huế/Phu Bai on 16 January 1967.

In 1966 and for the first half of 1967, the squadron's radio call sign was "Oakgate," which sometimes got confused for the term OK. Major Bill Murphy is credited with first using the call "Scarface" while on TAD, and lobbied to have the substantially more macho Scarface designation adopted as VMO-3's signature when all Marine squadrons in-country changed call signs during the summer of 1967. On 14 November 1967 Major General Bruno Hochmuth, then commanding general of the 3rd Marine Division was killed when a UH-1E Huey from VMO-3 exploded and crashed 5 miles northwest of Huế. Four others also died in this crash.

The squadron assumed a new identity in March 1968 when VMO-3 was re-designated HML-367 and immediately began operations in direct support of ground combat units. Based at Hue and Phu Bai, the squadron flew the Bell UH-1E Huey throughout I Corps in support of the 1st and 3rd Marine Divisions, the United States Army and the Army of the Republic of Vietnam. In addition to the countless other missions flown they most notably supported Operations Medina, Fortress Ridge, Prairie Fire, Project Delta, Sparrow Hawk, Dewey Canyon, Apache Snow, Swift Saber and Lam Son 719.

In addition to participating in the above operations, the Scarface crews also flew near daily missions in support of MACV-SOG on what were then top secret reconnaissance missions deep into Laos.

Squadron assets quickly grew from eighteen aircraft (UH-1E) to twenty five. In 1969, HML-367 exceeded 2,000 flight hours for the month of June. October 1969 saw the departure of Marine Air Group 36 from the Republic of Vietnam. Due to the continued necessity for armed helicopter support, HML-367 remained in Vietnam and was assigned to Marine Aircraft Group 16 (Forward) at Hue/Phu Bai.

The squadron supported almost every type of helicopter mission flown by Marines in Vietnam. Most missions were flown in support of Marine units, but many were flown for the U.S. Army and for the Korean Marines. With the increased Vietnamization of the War, numerous sorties were flown supporting the Army of the Republic of Vietnam.

On 24 April 1970, the Squadron had all of their twenty-five aircraft in an "Up" status. This was the first time a Helicopter Squadron had attained 100% aircraft availability in Vietnam. To celebrate the event, a 25-plane "fly-over" of Marble Mountain Air Facility was conducted with Plane Captains called on to fill the front seats of all 25 Cobras. Total flight time for Fiscal Year 1970 was 22,378 hours.

HML-367 completed its combat tour in South Vietnam in June 1971, and relocated to MCAS Futenma, Okinawa, rejoining MAG-36. Once established, the Squadron began peacetime operations using the UH-1E.

Post Vietnam 1970s
In April 1975, HML-367(REIN), with nine UH-1E's and twelve CH-46's deployed aboard the USS Midway (CV-41) and the USS Hancock (CV-19) in support of Operations Eagle Pull and Talon Vise/Frequent Wind, participating in the evacuation of Phnom Penh and Saigon. In June 1975, HML-367 returned to Okinawa and resumed normal operations. In 1976, the squadron took receipt of the new UH-1N and in 1977, AH-1J's Cobra gunships.

After more than eight years on the island of Okinawa, HML-367 was reassigned to Marine Aircraft Group 39 (MAG-39), 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, at MCAS Camp Pendleton. The majority of squadron personnel stayed behind, having been transferred to other units of the 1st Marine Air Wing. New personnel were selected from the parent command, and by August 1981, unit strength was up to 165 men and 16 aircraft.

1980s & 1990s
During this timeframe the HMLA-367 spent approximately six of each eighteen months split into rotations to Marine Corps Air Station Futenma, Okinawa, Japan as well as attached as Det "A" in Subic Bay, Philippines, and as part of an Aviation Combat Element (ACE) aboard an amphibious assault ship, typically the USS Tarawa (LHA-1) while in rotation with two other squadrons also based at MCAS Camp Pendleton.

While not on their rotation overseas, HMLA-367 supported major exercises deploying for training frequently to the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, California, Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona, Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada and Naval Air Station Fallon, Nevada.

HMLA-367 also supported combined US Navy & USMC security operations, "Kernel Usher & Kernel Blitz" aboard the USS Tarawa and other naval ships for exercises around the Pacific Coast of California.

Desert Storm/Desert Shield
Shortly after the invasion of Kuwait on 2 August 1990 HMLA-367 was quickly chosen as the Light Attack component for Marine Aircraft Group 70 (MAG-70) in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm and immediately deployed.

Scarface arrived in Al Jabail, Saudi Arabia on 29 August 1990, as the first operational U.S. Marine Light Attack Helicopter Squadron in theater. HMLA-367 recorded the first Iraqi tank kill by an AH-1W "Super Cobra" Helicopter during the battle of "Al Elbow" in Southwestern Kuwait on 30 January 1991.

HMLA-367 also had confirmed kills of military targets during both the Battle of Khafji on 30–31 January 1991 and the ground war which commenced on 24 February 1991.

HMLA-367 accrued confirmed kills of 48 tanks, 24 armored personnel carriers and 23 other troop transport vehicles, trucks, etc., as well as many other military targets, more than any other operational combat squadron during Desert Storm/Desert Storm.

On 12 March 1991, Scarface concluded operations and began departing Saudi Arabia, returning to Camp Pendleton, California.

HMLA-367 Scarface Marines were all awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal with 2 bronze stars, the Kuwait Liberation Medal (Saudi Arabia), & the Kuwait Liberation Medal ( Kuwait) for their service during Operation Desert Storm & Desert Shield combat operations.

Operations in Iraq & Afghanistan
The squadron was deployed for 13 months to Okinawa from 2002–03 and this was followed less than a year later by a deployment to Al Taqaddum, Iraq in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

While there, the squadron flew in support of numerous ground units including the 1st Marine Division during the Battle of Fallujah. In the next three years, Scarface would return to Iraq two more times in support of OIF 05-07.2 and OIF 08.1-08.2.

After three deployments to Iraq in only four years, Scarface returned to MCAS Camp Pendleton in November 2008 to transition its Huey pilots to the new UH-1Y, and to prepare for upcoming operations in Afghanistan.

After yet another turnaround of less than a year, HMLA-367 deployed to Afghanistan in October 2009 to support international security and assistance forces during Operation Enduring Freedom. The seven-month deployment was the first combat deployment of the UH-1Y. The squadron's skills were again put to the test as Scarface simultaneously provided support for seven infantry battalions and participated in the battles for Marjah and Now Zad in the Helmand Province of Afghanistan.

In April 2011 "Scarface" HMLA-367 was the first squadron to have both the newest upgraded four-blade rotor UH-1Y "Yankee" Huey utility helicopter and the AH-1Z "Zulu" Cobra gunships along with a state of the art flight simulator for each helicopter.

In 2012, Scarface deployed personnel and helicopters to the 15th MEU prior to moving the remainder of the squadron to its current location of Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay on island of Oahu in Hawaii. The unit reverted to the venerable AH-1W Super Cobra prior to the relocation to MCAS Kaneohe Bay. They have also conducted numerous deployments as part of the 31st MEU and to Okinawa as part of the Unit Deployment Program (UDP).

In March 2018, Scarface and the Marine Corps bid their final farewell to the AH-1W Super Cobra helicopters on Marine Corps Base Hawaii.

HMLA-367 was decommissioned in April 2022 as a part of the Commandant of the Marine Corps Force Design 2030 initiative and reactivated on 16 December 2022 aboard Marine Corps Air Station Camp Pendleton, California.

Unit awards
A unit citation or commendation is an award bestowed upon an organization for the action cited. Members of the unit who participated in said actions are allowed to wear on their uniforms the awarded unit citation. HMLA-367 has been presented with the following awards:

title: HMLA-367


text:
Lee Thompson Young

Lee Thompson Young (February 1, 1984 – August 19, 2013) was an American actor who began his career as a teenager, playing the titular character on the Disney Channel television series The Famous Jett Jackson (1998–2001). As an adult, major roles included playing Chris Comer in the movie Friday Night Lights (2004) and Boston police detective Barry Frost on the TNT police drama series Rizzoli & Isles (2010–14).

Early life
Young was born in Columbia, South Carolina, the son of Velma Elaine (née Love) and Tommy Scott Young. He was in the second grade when his parents' marriage ended, and he went to live with his mother. At age ten, he portrayed Martin Luther King Jr. in a play called A Night of Stars and Dreams by Dwight Woods at the Phillis Wheatley Repertory Theater of Greenville, South Carolina. It was then that Young decided he wanted to become an actor.

Career
Young moved to New York City in June 1996, but it was not until the next year that he auditioned for the part of Jett Jackson in The Famous Jett Jackson. He filmed the pilot and found out in June 1998 that the Disney Channel had picked up the show; it would go on to become a Disney Channel Original Movie in June 2001. Young also starred in Johnny Tsunami (1999), another Disney Channel Original Movie, as Sam Sterling. Although the movie was successful, he did not reprise the role in the sequel, Johnny Kapahala: Back on Board (2007).

After the cancellation of The Famous Jett Jackson, Young had guest spots in the CBS series The Guardian. He also had a part in the movie Friday Night Lights (2004), portraying Chris Comer, and a part in the Jamie Foxx movie Redemption: The Stan Tookie Williams Story (2004). Lee appeared on UPN's TV drama series South Beach, and he portrayed Victor Stone (known in DC Comics as Cyborg) in a fifth-season episode of the television series Smallville, in 2006; he reprised the character in the Season Six episode "Justice" (airdate January 18, 2007), and in the Season Nine finale "Salvation" (airdate May 14, 2010).

Young appeared in the feature film Akeelah and the Bee (2006), playing Akeelah's brother Devon. He played National Guard rookie Delmar in The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007). In 2009, Young played a cocky surgical intern in the hit comedy show Scrubs. It is revealed that his character had been overweight during childhood. The character becomes involved in a romance with one of the medical interns.

Young played the role of Al Gough, an FBI agent, in the ABC television drama FlashForward. He was written off the show in episode 7, when his character committed suicide to prevent the death of an innocent civilian.

He made an appearance on the Fox drama The Good Guys as the brother and business partner of an arms dealer. His last acting role was playing Barry Frost, partner of Jane Rizzoli (Angie Harmon) on the TNT drama Rizzoli & Isles.

Personal life
Young graduated with honors from the University of Southern California, where he majored in cinematic arts and was a member of the Kappa Alpha Psi fraternity. Young enjoyed writing and wrote the screenplay for the 2007 short film Mano.

Death
On August 19, 2013, Young failed to show up to film an episode of Rizzoli & Isles. Police were called to do a wellbeing check on him at his Los Angeles apartment, where he was found dead. His manager stated that the actor died by suicide. Police confirmed the cause of death as a self-inflicted gunshot wound. Young had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, for which he had been taking medication, and had been suffering from depression before his death.

After funeral services at Inglewood Park Cemetery, Young was interred at Lakeview Memorial Garden, York, South Carolina. A memorial service was held on the Paramount Studios lot.

Young's family launched the Lee Thompson Young Foundation in an effort to help remove the stigma surrounding mental illness.

title: Lee Thompson Young


text:
Template:Userfied

The article you created at is not suitable for a Wikipedia article, which must have a notable subject and be verifiable, but it may be a good start for your own userpage. I have moved it to User:, which is where you are encouraged to write about yourself. You are free to move it back into the (Main) namespace but bear in mind that if you do so, it is likely to be nominated for deletion.

The purpose of a user page is to enable active editors of Wikipedia to introduce themselves to other editors. Wikipedia is not a general hosting service, so you should not consider your user page to be a personal homepage. Content unrelated to Wikipedia or its editing may be removed.

Please see the user page guidelines, especially this section for more information.

title: Template:Userfied


text:
Talk:Larry Fine

e

Died in 1975 or 1990?
The article says he died in 1975 and in 1990. Which is it? --Mrwojo 23:41, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * He died in 1975, the same year that Moe did. --144.126.161.43 15:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Stimpy
Would it be appropriate to include the info that voice actor Billy West's characterization for Stimpy from the Ren and Stimpy cartoons was based on Larry Fine? He was one of the only people around doing a Larry Fine impression (which was flawless) and he simply raised the pitch of it to fit Stimpy.

 * I suppose so.144.126.161.43 15:10, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * But only if you provide a reference in a reliable source, per WP policy. David Spector (talk) 13:45, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

pro boxer
why did someone take out my text about him being a pro boxer. this is true and there is numerous written evidence to support this i am not making it up. Scapone --unsigned by 71.194.71.122 (talk) at 00:56, 11 April 2006

 * I can't speak for the person who reverted your text, Scapone, but I searched and found back-up for your bit about him being a boxer. I put it back in, with a citation. I find no evidence that he was suspended for dirty fighting, however. Do you have a credible source that backs that up? Rizzleboffin 23:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Here's the text I removed: "At one time, Larry was also a professional boxer. He was eventually suspended from the sport for dirty tactics such as eye gouging and low blows." No reference was cited.  Can you blame me for assuming this was a joke?  : )   dbtfz talk 00:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Certainly understandable, Dbtfz... I think I read about Larry being a boxer in the book his brother wrote on him. I'll look it up tomorrow, and substitute that as a more reliable source, if I find it. I suspect the part about Larry being suspended for Stooge-like behavior in the ring, however, is either a joke or a a bit of creativity on the part of Scapone's memory. Rizzleboffin 02:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Here are two passages on Larry's boxing career:
 * "But now, it was time to pick a special sport: a sport that he would want to concentrate a lot of time and energy on, a sport that would make maximum use of his arms. Tennis, say. Or golf. Larry chose boxing.
 * By the age of 14, Larry had become a real terror in the ring. I was taller than Larry at this point, but I sure didn't pick on him.
 * He had joined a local gymnasium and made friends with its manager, a boxing promoter named Philip Glassman. Mr. Glassman had taken him under his wing, and soon he was sparring with the best in the business. The guy who led the calisthenics training was Benny Bass, who went on to become featherweight champion of the world.
 * Sometimes, vaudeville theaters would raise all their back-drops and show a few amateur fights in the middle of their shows. And Larry fought in a few of those. But Mother and Dad were opposed to Larry boxing in public. So Larry adopted the name, "Kid Roth," and hoped for the best.
 * Dad found out, though. Another jeweler dropped by his shop and niadvertently blew the whistle: "Hey, Joe, I see your kid's going pro next weekend! He did pretty well against the Zimmerman kid last night. But do you reallyt hink he's ready for a pro match?"
 * Dad was furious. Larry fought his professional match and won. But Dad was in attendance. And at the end of the fight, he dragged an embarrassed Larry out of the ring by his ear.
 * It was his last fight. True, he had beaten his scheduled opponent, but when he and Dad left no one could say he was retiring undefeated."

 * p.22

 * "He also took up boxing during his formative years, primarily to further strengthen his arm.
 * As was the case with the violin, Feinberg was a quick study. After training alongside such fighters as featherweight champion Benny Bass, he began taking amateur fights as a teen, showing promise. Until his father found out.
 * Clearly feeling that his son's future was in music, the elder Feinberg tracked him down to a gym. After watching his son win by early knock-out, Feinberg cornered the youth and threatened to clean his clock. The boxing career was over, though learning to take a punch would certainly come in handy when he became a human punching bag for Healy and later Moe."

 * p.15

So, it seems that his brief boxing career is factual, but it was put to an end by his father, rather than due to suspension for dirty fighting. I'll touch up the bit on his boxing in the article. Rizzleboffin 22:17, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Nice job on the research!  dbtfz talk 01:04, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Sections
Can someone split this article into sections? Currently, it's lead-TOC-trivia-etc., which means the majority of the article is in the lead. Which is bad. — SheeEttin {T/C} 23:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

move Duja ► 13:22, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Larry Fine (actor) → Larry Fine — This Larry Fine is the most well known. —YUL89YYZ 16:41, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

 * Support. The only other Larry Fine, Larry Fine (pianos) [sic], is borderline AfD material. —   AjaxSmack    06:28, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
Any additional comments:

''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.''

Wrong Don Lamond
The link to the article on Don Lamond is incorrect. Mr. Lamond lives or did live in Las Vegas, NV. The entry in the Internet Movie Database refers to Don Lamond the jazz drummer and mistakenly identifies him as being Don Lamond the television announcer, formerly of KTTV in Los Angeles, and Larry Fine's son-in-law. --T.E. Goodwin (talk) 00:32/00:46, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Larry's name
Named Louis Feinberg at birth, he is better known as Larry Fine. The article says, "known professionally as Larry Fine," but there is evidence that Larry Fine was his legal name at the time of his death. His social security number, 564-14-1176, was under the name of Larry Fine. Source: the Social Security Death Index, searchable at http://ssdi.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/ssdi.cgi. So rather than saying "known professionally as", the article should probably indicate that it was his real name at the time of his death, or some such. I don't have any source to say when the legal name changed happened; the social security number may have been issued to Feinberg, and later changed by deed poll. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 19:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Stroke Of Luck
Larry Fine's imdb bio currently says that Fine "Published a memoir in 1973 titled A Stroke Of Luck, now rare. This is wrong...the full story of this rip-off book is told in the preface to Fine's "authorized biography," which can be read at Google Books. http://books.google.com/books?id=ddCtMD2LZ0wC&lpg=PR11&ots=1zBRmRluu1&dq=james%20carone%20larry%20fine&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q=james%20carone%20larry%20fine&f=false The story of the rip-off bio should be summarized here, as copies are still turning up on Ebay, and selling for hundreds. Bustter (talk) 04:46, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Picture
The prominently featured pic of "Disorder in the Court" is obviously squashed. Maybe someone can replace it with an undistorted image which actually resembles the person. --BjKa (talk) 07:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Muscle damage
"violin lessons to help strengthen the damaged muscles". What damaged muscles? The article only talks about some acid incident, but the kinds of acids which jewellers use certainly couldn't have done any damage beyond the skin. --BjKa (talk) 07:54, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Larry Fine. 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/20120729073719/http://www.threestooges.com/bios/bios.php?intStoogeID=2 to http://www.threestooges.com/bios/bios.php?intStoogeID=2

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:58, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

One family member left out is that Larry had a brother who remained a tailor in Philadelphia,Pa. all his life.In the colonial section of Philadelphia,there is an enormous wall mural of Larry marking the spot where his brother's shop was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.23.5.11 (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Larry Fine


text:
Cockney School

The "Cockney School" refers to a group of poets and essayists writing in England in the second and third decades of the 19th century. The term came in the form of hostile reviews in Blackwood's Magazine in 1817. Its primary target was Leigh Hunt, but John Keats and William Hazlitt were also included. Only Keats could properly be regarded as a cockney. Hazlitt was not even born in London. John Scott died after a duel over the controversy.

Each of the writers was derided for a slightly different quality. Keats, for example, was accused of "low diction" for rhyming "thorns/fawns" in "Sleep and Poetry" and other rhymes which suggested a working class speech. Hunt and Hazlitt were similarly vilified for their diction, but the criticisms were more ideological with them than with Keats. John Wilson Croker perpetuated the term "Cockney School" beyond the pages of Blackwood's in 1818 when he attacked Keats's Endymion in the Quarterly Review. John Wilson (Christopher North) and John Gibson Lockhart had joined its staff in 1817. Lockhart shared in the caustic and aggressive articles that marked the early years of Blackwood, but his biographer Andrew Lang denied he was responsible for the virulent articles on Samuel Taylor Coleridge and on "The Cockney School of Poetry" of Leigh Hunt, Keats and their friends. Lockhart has been accused of the later Blackwood article (August 1818) on Keats, but he did show appreciation of Coleridge and Wordsworth.[4]

Background
The term, and the campaign against Hunt and the others, was not a question of aesthetics. It was, instead, an attack on the class background of the authors and their aspirations to the highest level of the literati, and it was, additionally, a reaction to the "Cockney" politics of the authors. The political, reformist agenda and the democratic ideology of Hunt and Hazlitt were offensive to the Blackwood's review staff, and the cultural and class background of the authors was introduced as a mechanism. Percy Bysshe Shelley was accused of being similarly offensive politically, but the reviewers excused him for his genius (and, of course, his high birth).

The second generation of the Romantic movement was as politically and economically revolutionary as it was aesthetically challenging to the status quo, and the controversy and partial reviewers responsible for the creation of the "Cockney School" epithet foreground how offensive it was to the establishment that lower class persons might emerge. According to the 1907 Nuttall's Brief Encyclopedia, the term was revived in the 1890s by working class London poets, but, although this may have been en vogue at the turn of the twentieth century, the term is currently remembered for the Romantic reference only.

title: Cockney School


text:
Talk:Mark Keppel High School

Tone
Two uses of the word "harmonious" in two adjoining paragraphs. Flowery marketing prose, inappropriate for an encyclopedia entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.106.227.211 (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

2000s content
Much more information needs to be added about the 2000s. Once there is enough substantial information, there's much we can do to rearrange the information so that it looks like the form of the Stuy article's organization.

Notable Alumni
Some of these people aren't really even famous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.54.249.157 (talk) 09:15, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

SFC DAVED LEATON U.S. ARMY RET bronz  star recipient  class of 87 Drill10 (talk) 01:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
 * He does not have a Wikiarticle, and does not seem to be notable. See WP:MILPEOPLE. Meters (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Rewrite
Assiduously working on flowery language and la-de-da stuff. ;-) Resource:http://www.aacompcenter.org/cs/wested/view/sdp/19  — DocOfSoc • Talk  •  09:51, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 October 2014
Additional Notable alumni:

Frederick J Ryan, Class of 1973. Former Chief of Staff for Ronald Regan and current Chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Ronald Regan Foundation.

He was also Vice President of the senior class of 1973. No internet link for that, but I have a copy of the 1973 yearbook and can send you a scan of relevant pages.

echeeseman2@gmail.com

63.230.21.6 (talk) 00:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes please, a source (eg a scan of the page) for that would be great. Stickee (talk) 01:24, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

✅ I have called him Fred Ryan as our article, and assumed good faith as we don't accept scans - Arjayay (talk) 11:01, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mark Keppel High School. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/69eubbr8I?url=http://www.cifss.org/pdfs/record_book_new.pdf to http://www.cifss.org/pdfs/record_book_new.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070402085543/http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7723397/site/newsweek/page/5/ to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7723397/site/newsweek/page/5/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mark Keppel High School


text:
Sudare

Sudare (簾/すだれ) are traditional Japanese screens or blinds, made of horizontal slats of decorative wood, bamboo, or other natural material, woven together with simple string, colored yarn, or other decorative material to make nearly solid blinds Sudare can be either rolled or folded up out of the way. They are also sometimes called misu (御簾/みす), particularly if they have a green fabric hem. Yoshizu, non-hanging sudare, are made of vertical slats of common reed and used as screen.

Sudare are used in many Japanese homes to shield the verandah and other openings of the building from sunlight, rain, and insects. They are normally put up in spring and taken down again in autumn. Their light structure allows breezes to pass through, a benefit in the hot Japanese summers. Since the building materials are easy to find, sudare can be made cheaply.

Elaborate sudare for palaces and villas used high-quality bamboo, with expensive silk and gold embroidery worked in. Sometimes they featured paintings, most often on the inside; some Chinese screens had symbols painted on the outside as well.

Social role
Sudare protect the inhabitants of the building not only from the elements, but also from the eyes of outsiders. They are featured prominently in The Tale of Genji.

During the Heian period (794–1185), a court lady would conceal herself behind a screen when speaking with a man outside her immediate family. She could peep through it and see her interlocutor, but because he had to remain at a distance from it, he could not see her. Only with her permission might he step closer and only she would ever raise the screen. Any unwarranted moves on the man's part were seen as a grave breach of etiquette and a threat against the lady's honour.

Sudare were also used in imperial audiences. Since looking directly at the Emperor of Japan was forbidden, he would sit hidden behind a screen in the throne hall, with only his shoes showing. This practice fell out of use as imperial power declined.

Modern production
Following the Edo period (1603–1867) and in the ensuing Meiji period (1868–1911), the production of sudare went into decline and became a traditional handicraft, but they still are sold and shipped abroad by various companies. These sudare are typically woven on looms.

Museum
A museum in Amano-cho, Kawachinagano, Osaka traces the history of sudare. Tools and machines used to manufacture them, as well as sudare from other countries, are on display.

title: Sudare


text:
User talk:Puffycleo

sarah lin"s pets

title: User talk:Puffycleo


text:
Talk:Clayton High School (North Carolina)

Untitled
Very good start ... see other pages for ideas ... photo? more refs? Victuallers 17:08, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit new gym
New gym supports 4 classrooms. Just to clarify. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wrathful God (talk • contribs) 01:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Change title
Suggested: Clayton High School (NC)--Jnelson09 19:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism or not
I reverted this edit since the same IP did this 2 days later, but since it is a public IP the first is probably correct, but I still rather revert it until someone can verify it. --Stefan talk 14:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I can verify that he left the school at the end of last year, and that Mr. Eaves *brutally* took over, but I don't know whether or not he was there for that many years, he left when I was just a sophmore...24.162.226.125 (talk) 23:04, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Auditorium renovation
The Auditorium was renovated in (I think) 2007, presumably after the curtains got set on fire. All the curtains, including the grand drape and the mid-curtains had huge holes in them, and were thus replaced, and the chairs, which had previously been made of wood and had desks attached, were replaced with cushioned seats. I have no idea if other changes were made, or if what I have said is completely accurate, but I think it would be a worthwhile thing to note, since this article seams to focus largely on the construction of the current school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CatDemonNinja (talk • contribs) 02:51, 10 March 2011 (UTC)