text:
Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/BigDaddy777

Original text of request for arbitration:

Involved parties
User:Kizzle, User:Derex, User:Paul_Klenk, User:JamesMLane, User:RyanFreisling, User:Lord Voldemort, User:Hipocrite
 * Many other users may be involved, for a complete list, please see: Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777
 * Many other users may be involved, for a complete list, please see: Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777

 * Confirmation that all parties are aware of the request

-- RyanFreisling @ 02:53, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

-- Eleemosynary 03:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I have notified all parties listed as involved:  Mr. Tibbs 03:21, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * BigDaddy is aware of this RfAr and responded to my notice on his talk page with even more personal attacks: . BigDaddy then proceeded to My talk page where he posted more uncivil rhetoric: . -- Mr. Tibbs 18:57, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Confirmation that other steps in dispute resolution have been tried

Requests_for_comment/BigDaddy777 has stalled because BigDaddy777 refuses to even comment or acknowledge the RfC in any way. A poll was then taken as to whether or not this should go to Arbitration, and was subsequently heavily supported.

Statement by User:Kizzle
User:BigDaddy777 began editing at Wikipedia in the beginning of September, and quickly racked up an incredible amount of personal attacks and WP:AGF / Civility violations, as evidenced in the evidence section of his current RfC. As a result, a RfC was brought against him to convince him to change his behavior (see the intro paragraphs to the RfC and Hipocrite and my note to BigDaddy on his talk page for the motives behind filing the RfC). BigDaddy refused to comment or apologize for his behavior and completely ignored the RfC's purpose or existence.

However, his edits became slightly more focused upon the content rather than his co-editors, thus I offered to suspend the RfC in order to foster good behavior (as I certainly wouldn't feel happy editing with a pending RfC against me). After this request was made, User:Hipocrite pointed out BigDaddy's continued attack upon other editors. At this point, I offered only to rescind the RfC if he would simply comment on the RfC page something to the effect of "I will not commit personal attacks anymore" or anything along the lines of recognizing that his behavior was not ok. I gave him ample time and kindly requested several times that he respect Wikpedia procedures and comment on his own RfC, but to date he still has refused. Thus, I rescinded the offer and sought community concensus to bring this to RfA.

The problem with BigDaddy's perception of his co-editors can be summarized in his own words, taken from a post made yesterday:

 * A whole bunch of Left-leaning Editors get together and, drawing from dubious sources and histrionic partisan windbags, string together a laundry list of unsubstantiated allegations, unfounded rumors and outright fabrications, and post it within the body of articles on conservative public figures they wish to marginalize under the category of 'Controversy' or 'Criticism.' Should someone suggest even the most modest of changes in order to bring the tiniest hint of balance, they fight them tooth and nail on...every...single...point before filing an RfC against them for being too uppity (sometimes they say 'too combative' but it's the same thing.) Finally, when confronted with the treachery of their actions, and exposed to the appropriate way to deal with rumor and innuendos in Wikipedia articles (usually found where the subject is a Democrat) they put their fingers in their ears and start shouting "Na, Na, Na...I can't hear you! Or else they simply demagogue the issue, distort the rules and spirit of Wikipedia to defend the perpetual and endemic on-line character assassinations of conservatives, and applaud one another for their wisdom. Kind of like what just happened here. -

BigDaddy continues to drag discussions down into a left/right war akin to an online discussion forum such as DailyKos or FreeRepublic, and does not listen or respond to any attempts to cite actual Wikipedia policies. His lack of understanding policy in combination with his "my way or the highway" style of editing has significantly dampered the general atmosphere of civil discussions on every page that he has become a part of. '''But the primary reason why I am bringing this to RfA is his continued silence on his own RfC. Someone who is too stubborn to even acknowledge that other people have a problem with his behavior needs to have real consequences.''' In fact, BigDaddy recently gave his opinion on the heavily supported RfC against him and this arbitration request:

 * Actually my footnotes 1 and 2 above pretty much explain  your  motives. Thus, this rabble-rousing attempt to revive a pathetically overwrought and hysterically shrill dead-as-a-doornail pretend 'problem' which never rose to the level of being dignified by my acknowledgment the first time around, help vindicate my thesis far more eloquently than I ever thought possible. And for that I give you heartfelt thanks.Big Daddy 12:04, 1 October 2005 (UTC) -

From this example, BigDaddy inarguably demonstrates his inability to look at his own behavior, which is the reason behind this arbitration request.

While I would not expect those reviewing this case to sift through each and every comment, here are a few sections which should speak for themselves if one has the time:

 * Talk:Karl_Rove
 * Talk:Karl_Rove
 * Talk:Ann_Coulter
 * User_talk:BigDaddy777
 * User_talk:BigDaddy777

This exchange (later modified by BigDaddy) alone merits taking BigDaddy to arbcom for making threats (and emphasizing them with huge red lettering):

 * This whole thing called a dispute resolution process might seem to be a joking matter to you, but just in case you didn't have your pending arbcom request on your watchlist, it just got accepted by 2 arbcom members. Just a heads-up. --kizzle 02:42, 2 October 2005 (UTC))

 * You know, I hear these kind of things backfire when they're filed for transparently obvious political reasons. Just a heads-up. Big Daddy 03:38, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Update: Just checked with an important source. This attempt to silence me from addressing the endemic bias in Wikipedia will backfire.  I guarantee it. :)  Big Daddy 04:05, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

(the above section was copied exactly as it was coded, the creepy red lettering is BigDaddy's)

Finally (seriously this time), in response to BigDaddy's comment:

 * The unvarnished truth is that, in every single instance, those wishing to stifle my influence in Wikipedia have a political agenda. It is curious that I get along so well with the conservative editors who have worked with me on various articles. Not one of them has affirmed these charges [emphasis mine]...It's only in political (primarily conservative) commentators columns that I've been maligned and it's only non-conservatives who have done the maligning.

Here's a post right on BigDaddy's own user talk page:

 * Hi, BigDaddy777. I'm a right-winger, and it is definitely possible to work within consensus here. You need to read up on WP:NPOV. If you don't want to follow the policies, then you need to just leave. But let me promise you that NPOV is a beautiful treaty that does allow for consensus between left-wing, right-wing, and any other positions, and working in this way is very rewarding. But if you don't want to do that, please don't be a troublemaker. Jdavidb 20:55, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

It is my wish to seek a temporary ban only on political pages for User:BigDaddy777 until he can calm down and learn a proper sense of Wikiquette by editing non-controversial pages first. Once he has done so, I would be the first to welcome him back with a newfound understanding of Wikipedia norms, policies, and etiquette.

Statement by Mr. Tibbs
Ever since BigDaddy777's very first edit, he has subjected Wikipedia to an unrelenting tirade of personal attacks, uncivil rhetoric and edit warring. User after User after User has attempted to parley with BigDaddy777 and persuade him to follow Wikipedia's rules, they have all failed. Instead of improving his behavior, BigDaddy has used this new knowledge of Wikipedia policy to try and game the system. BigDaddy has succeeded in baiting other users and forcing several articles into reversion wars, or even page protection while completely ignoring the consensus regarding his extremely POV edits. BigDaddy's behavior is completely unacceptable and needs to be stopped. Given the severity, frequency, and incredibly disruptive nature of BigDaddy's transgressions, I ask that a temporary injunction be made restricting BigDaddy to editing only his UserPages, and pages regarding his own arbitration case until this is settled. -- Mr. Tibbs 02:39, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Ryan Freisling
BigDaddy777 is a classic internet troll who communicates by chiding, threatening, blustering and accusations. The citations of examples for his RfC were in the triple digits before the 'disputed behavior after this RfC' section was moved to talk. For a juicy list of cites please see. -- RyanFreisling @ 03:05, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Eleemosynary
I concur with the above users. "BigDaddy777" is a particularly vicious troll, who vacillates between full-throated abuse and disruptive attempts to game the system. Check his RFC page, the history of his User Profile page, and the Karl Rove Talk Page for screed upon screed of vitriol and threats (some veiled, and some not). I've asked him several times to respond to his RFC page. He has labelled this "stalking" and has issued the (laughably) ominous "you've been warned" in response. --Eleemosynary 03:56, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Here is a very recent quote, fresh off his talk page, in which he discusses those Wikipedia editors who take issue with his POV edits:

 * "LOL! These guys don't get it. If you try to present fairness and balance, they will treat you like Karl Rove who of course is their hate-surrogate for President Bush who in turn is a surrogate for who they ultimately hate most - Jesus. Since I'm just a 3rd generation hate-surrogate target, their bluster is pretty mild. But the closer you go up their food chain, it gets pretty nasty. They harassed Karl Rove's family home, threw a live grenade at President Bush and don't forget what they did to Jesus...Big Daddy Ps I knew all this going in. Have had TONS of experienced with these types of disturbed individuals. And I really hate to toy with them like this, but there's not much you can do with irrational people. Trust me, reason does not work. lol! Big Daddy 08:52, 1 October 2005 (UTC)"

I see I've been quoted at length below. I did indeed make each of those statements (not all of which are attacks, btw), but only in response to personal attacks initiated by the subject of this Arbitration, which I will enumerate (upon request) when Arbitration begins. I realize this is no excuse, however. To be accused of "personal attacks" by this particular user is [insert your favorite pot/kettle analogy here]. However, it does seem I am certainly guilty of rising to too much of his troll bait, as a check of the source page for each of those statements will show.Eleemosynary 05:26, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Derex
I reluctantly agree that the time has come for arbitration. I only became involved in this controversy long after it had started. I had until recently hoped that BD could be persuaded to edit in a different spirit. I now see little likelihood of that without some relief from this arbitration process. BD has refused to even recognize the RFC, which was endorsed by 18 editors. After the RFC, he to some extent replaced his over-the-top hostility with a less blatantly outrageous, but still obvious and persistent, contempt of other editors. Plenty of people have reached out to him to no avail. Here's my attempt, which, despite BD's civilized response, changed his behavior not a whit. Here's my attempt to warn him that his behaviors, if continued, would likely move other editors to seek relief. Other editors have attempted to sincerely work towards achieving neutral language, taking even his more outrageous suggested language as a baseline. Rather than building on this to achieve a neutral compromise, BD repeatedly insists that this article conform to a (clearly flawed) precedent of some other article, thus ignoring the substantive issues at hand in this article; see Talk:Karl_Rove. In short, he changed the topic rather than sincerely work together towards a compromise, which seemed to me achievable. BD has repeatedly taken the attitude this is how it's going to be, this is contrary to the spirit of congenial dialogue and consensus here. In short, BD really has been much more disruptive than constructive. He refuses to take seriously any community input on his attitude apart from his edits; he won't even pay it lip service. I don't know what else to do but ask for some kind of intervention. Derex 22:55, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by NightMonkey
I will second most everything stated by the above users, who have been more affected than myself by BigDaddy777's uncivil and nonconstructive behavior. I was soured on being involved in editing any article he has participated in as soon as he started to rant, rail and crusade against the "liberal POV conspiracy" he feels is endemic to Wikipedia, and only returned within the last week or so to check back in on Karl Rove. I'm glad I decided to quickly "take a break" from caring about this and other similar politically charged articles, which was a good move, now seeing how this has developed. It is sad how quickly one person can so thoroughly distract and dishearten other volunteering Wikipedia editors for such a long time, without anything to really stop them in a timely fashion. I've asked him to stop his name-calling and other personal attacks. I even suggested to him that he just start a blog, where he is free to do as he pleases, which he interpreted as a personal attack. All to no avail. A month of this has been a month too long.

In addition to the ban on editing political articles' associated pages, I request that some ban be placed on his edits of other users' User and Talk pages. He seems to think that he is better able to be "unseen" there and often accuses people who are merely disagreeing with him that they are making personal attacks and/or stalking him, by merely using the tools made available to all Wikipedia users to track edits.

His general readiness to engage in "barroom fight" baiting and Rush Limbaugh-style labeling of other editors is very off-putting, distracting and annoying, and precludes any attempt at consensus and dialog. His pointed absence from the RfC process is not a good sign for improvement. I have a feeling he's even lumped me in with his specious "liberal POV warriors" crowd. Funny, since I'm a Libertarian. ;) Thank you for your time. --NightMonkey 23:57, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note on BigDaddy777's quote of me below. While I did indeed say that I would help revert any of his "low quality edits", I must underscore the "low quality" component of my statement. To be clear, what I did not say was that I would revert any high quality edits that he would make. --NightMonkey 09:17, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Woohookitty
I'll be brief. I want to echo what everyone else has said. In addition, I really like that BD's comments about wanting Wikipedia recruiting conservative editors to contract the liberalism proves that he has no clue what Wikipedia is about. He does not assume good faith, which is the policy here. Instead, he assumes that everyone is attacking him because he's a conservative and everyone here is a liberal...even people like Katefan0 who have shown absolutely no indication of political bias. Wikipedia should not "recruit" anyone. It doesn't work that way. The fact that he thinks that Wikipedia should "recuit conservatives" proves that he doesn't understand Wikipedia's purpose, which is to be NPOV. The only efforts he has made to be NPOV have been to use the policy for his own advantage.

In addition, banning Eleemosynary is an entirely separate issue and should not be addressed here. This is about BigDaddy777, not Eleemosynary.

Oh and I haven't seen this mentioned earlier, but BD supresses other viewpoints on his talkpage. More evidence that he doesn't respect other opinions on Wikipedia, which is a requirement for being a NPOV editor. If you can't collaborate, you shouldn't be here. His latest thing seems to be to label people who contradict him as "stalking". has the original comments made by kizzle under "Arbitration requested". --Woohookitty 06:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * There's an irony here. I'm quite conservative myself, and I find BD's desire that "significant and widespread efforts (should) be launched immediately to actively recruit conservative editors" to be very close to affirmative action, which smacks of state intervention, equals bad thing. I believe that Wikipedia's bias is a product of gravitation rather than prescription, just as newspapers such as the Daily Telegraph and the Manchester Guardian - without explicitly forbidding left- and right-wing contributors, respectively - tend to attract such people by a process of positive feedback. Unlike newspapers, which are closed-up, I see Wikipedia as more akin to a daisyworld, and any bias in one direction will eventually rouse the other side to action. In this instance Mr BD is a symptom of this, although he is unfortunately harming his cause. Although he comes across as a blustering wingbag, how go his article contributions? -Ashley Pomeroy 10:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Statement by Big Daddy 777
To begin, I think it will be helpful for the sake of context, to read about some of my accusers. Most of the following are recent posts from them on various pages of Wikipedia:

Eleemosynary

*Awww... the widdle twoll wants attention. Darn right it's a personal attack. I'll call you what you are, a pathetic troll, until the cows come home, trollboy. Eleemosynary 09:56, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

*Boy, this troll sure is pathetic. ... It seems all he wants to do is demonize those he disagrees with and build an altar of worship to Karl Rove. What a sad individual. Eleemosynary 08:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

*You're welcome, Little Baby! There are also some "stalkers" right outside your door in white coats. They have a pleasant little room for you, with soft walls and nice bars on the window so you won't hurt yourself falling out. Go with them, and you can build pretty collages celebrating Karl Rove to your heart's content! LOL! Eleemosynary 08:54, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

*Proof positive! "Little Baby" lives in his own deluded universe, taking breaks from vandalizing Wikipedia only to travel to the drug store for hand lotion so he can better, um, "enjoy" his Ann Coulter picture collection. Duly noted! Eleemosynary 08:50, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

* He's also blatantly lied to you. He's been multiply reverting edits on the Ann Coulter page all day, under cover of an anonymous address/sockpuppet. Eleemosynary 04:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC) (NOTE: This charge is totally untrue and has been denounced by both myself and the person he claims is my sockpuppet. I'm sure someone knowledgable of the inner workings of Wikipedia could easily disprove this charge-bd777.)

*No need to engage this vandal, nor any of his anonymous sockpuppets. Any POV edits of his will be reverted. Eleemosynary 20:51, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

I'll endeavor to ignore his nonsense, and just revert his POV edits until Arbitration is concluded. Thanks again for all your hard work. Eleemosynary 23:38, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

RyanFreisling

Created mirror of my talk page entitled Trollspit to which she adds '(trollspit, for posterity :))'

According to Paul Klenk -

*Ryan made five reverts to Karl Rove in just over 18 hours.This is her pattern: '''She tries to disguise her reverts by going on the offense, making unfounded accusations of vandalism, POV...I believe each of her accusations, in themselves, assume bad faith. '''

*I suspect that she uses bullying to scare off editors you disagree with.

*She repeats the word "vandalism" over and over, but none of BigDaddy's edits on the page are vandalism.

* Ryan's continued bullying, elbow-jabbing, and accusations of bad faith while making her 5RRs. She was fueling the war. She was disguising her reverts with her continued accusations

*(Ryan's) false accusations, and (Ryan's) attitude towards BigDaddy, have clearly played a part in the many heated disputes on the Rove talk page.

Woohookitty

* "I'm sure you will now call me a Commie pinko liberal for daring to contradict you."

Kizzle

*Thanks for the laugh Big Daddy...I'd respond to your comment but I'm afraid that would constitute feeding the troll. (Very first comment to me. bd777) --kizzle 16:48, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

According to user 64.154.26.251, Kizzle and his accomplices have harassed me on the Ann Coulter page. "They reverted all your recent contributions for the sole purpose of imposing a make-believe "sanction" on you unauthorized by any administrator of Wikipedia." 64.154.26.251 01:05, 3 October 2005 (UTC

''User Kizzle is the individual who replaced a photo of President Bush here with a tight close-up photo of a pierced penis. He has fully admitted to deliberately engaging in this vandalism for the expressed purposes of getting banned because he's a self-described 'Wikaholic' and was unable to stop posting of his own accord.''

NightMonkey

*I am a fan of debate, and love the challenge it presents. I believe that editing and hashing out discussions on Wikipedia...will help me to... understand the thinking of people I may disagree with, disagree with civility and gain a more well-rounded understanding of various political and social beliefs. --NightMonkey 06:36, Aug 2, 2004 (UTC)

*"Hey, I have an idea, BD. Why don't you start your own blog? You can rant all day there...A month of this crap is enough. --NightMonkey 03:33, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

*I was going to copy and paste ... your exhortation on the RfC Talk page to ignore BD's Talk page diatribes and revert BD's low quality edits, ... Personally, I think it is a very good idea. --NightMonkey 08:23, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

''And finally, here are the comments of someone I consider a very wise user that's understood what's been going on from the beginning. (He is frequently harassed too, by the way.)''

Gator1

*Now the threats...what a surprise. All of this from an RFC that they said wasn't meant to punish you....now if you don't respond to them or bend to their will and tell them what they want to hear then it "could get much more serious." This IS a joke and will go nowhere as its unfounded and completely unwarranted. Next thing you know, they're going to start threatening me ... Some people just make me sad...Gator1 17:53, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

*Despite a reasonable motion to suspend the RFC, Hipo still wants his pound of flesh and Kizzle, depsite making the motion, quickly reverses himself when he sees Hipo's very rationale response ("no"). It's clear what the whole thing is about. I have removed the RFC page from my watchlist as it is a complete waste of my time. Gator1 02:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

They wanted you to change your behavior...you did and they said they wanted you to respond....you did....and now they'll set the bar higher once again and say you didn't respond with the right words and kiss all their butts ("I'm sorry...I suck...please forgive me.....I'll be good, I promise.....etc").....this is a very familiar pattern...Gator1 18:18, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

My Comments

What the users who have most significantly animated this process have demonstrated most notably is their utter contempt for Wikipedia policies themselves, be it demonstrated through what some would consider pornographic page vandalism, multiple-revert bullying, or incessant personal attacks and stalking.

It was not stubborness that gave me pause in addressing this process. But rather the certain knowing  that there's a difference between someone sincerely wanting to help you succeed at Wikipedia, like user ngb for example, and someone just wanting to 'get you' because they don't like you upsetting the status quo.

The unvarnished truth is that, in every single instance, those wishing to stifle my influence in Wikipedia have a political agenda. It is curious that I get along so well with the conservative editors who have worked with me on various articles. Not one of them has affirmed these charges. It's also interesting to observe the acrimony-free manner in which various editors and I have worked on topics as sensitive as religion in the Ann Arbor Michigan article. Surely, if even a tiny percentage of what's alleged about me were true, it would show up in edits where I'm dealing with the sensitive topic of Christianity with non-believers. It's only in political (primarily conservative) commentators columns that I've been maligned and it's only ''non-conservatives who have done the maligning. ''

User Paul Klenk has worked long and hard to educate me on how to work within the Wikipedia community. He has also spent an extraordinary (and thankless) amount of time defending me against these charges. But, why? ''Is he a defender of incivility? Does Paul Klenk champion the right to bully, intimidate and hassle? ''Or is it that he simply finds it distasteful when a new editor is marginalized by charges his very accusers are guilty of?

It has been said "Hell hath no fury as a vested interest masquerading as a moral principle." In this matter, the moral principle is my alleged disruptive behavior. And yet the key to uncovering the vested interest is found in the 'moral principle' itself. '''It is my critics interest that articles about conservatives be kept from more careful scrutiny. Thus, any such efforts by someone with my unflinching disdain for bias will always be perceived as disruptive.'''

-

I am therefore asking that arbitration be ruled in my favor so I can continue the excellent work I have begun. I also ask that user Eleemosynary be banned from Wikipedia for a period of at least one year for engaging in willful, acknowledged and unrepentant personal attacks, a disturbing pattern of stalking, false sock puppet allegations, malicious reverts and a general disdain for anything that comes even remotely close to building community cohesion.

Finally, I propose that significant and widespread efforts be launched immediately to actively recruit conservative editors to work on controversial political topics at Wikipedia. It is my hope that never again will a conservative editor have to endure the brazen hostility and withering gang-partisan attacks that I have withstood without a countervaling support system.

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/0/0)

 * 1) Accept Fred Bauder 13:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Accept ➥the Epopt 22:10, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Accept. James F. (talk) 07:59, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
 * 4) Accept Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 12:23, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Further comments
I would like to see somewhere on the main page:

Plaintiffs allege BigDaddy777:
 * Has made an extreme amount of personal attacks.
 * Has been extremely uncivil.
 * Has deliberately made statements intended to provoke hostility (trolling).
 * Has persistently edit warred.
 * Has made POV edits.
 * Has occassionally vandalized articles.

Or something like that. Just a summary of all the rules BigDaddy has broken, listed from top to bottom in order of importance and severity. Also I think it is very important to note the extreme nature of BigDaddy's personal attacks and incivility. Both issues are not normal because of the sheer amount of infractions and the incredibly venomous language used in many incidents. Mr. Tibbs 06:10, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You can modify your own statement to reflect these allegations if I'm not mistaken. --kizzle 06:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Just wanted to comment on my comment
The following text appears at the top of the RFArb:

 * Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Recognizing that my comment will probably not be very useful, I'd like to repost the following, which I put on the original request before the RFArb was accepted (and probably did not put in the right place):

 * Comment: BigDaddy contacted me privately to assert that my comment had been quoted as evidence that another conservative editor had maligned him or called him out for his behavior. Looking at the actual citation, however, I don't see any comments on what I said, so I do not believe Kizzle was necessarily asserting this. It should be known that I came across BigDaddy completely at random and, with no knowledge of his editing history, posted an encouragement from one conservative to another to work within the rules of Wikipedia. I just wanted to state for the record, in case there was any confusion, that my comment to BigDaddy does not reflect any knowledge of or opinion about his behavior on Wikipedia which, as far as I know, may be anywhere from exemplary to reprehensible. Jdavidb 16:34, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

To sum up, I just want to say that my comment to BigDaddy should not be construed as implying that I looked at his actions and made any conclusions, not that I think anyone is necessarily construing it that way.

Since the RFArb does say comments will be read in full, I'd like to ask that one of the arbitrators please post a quick note here saying "read it," or something to that affect. Sorry if I've taken up more time than this is worth. :)

Jdavidb 18:15, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey Jdavidb, I just quoted your entire post to BigDaddy on his talk page verbatim in my statement on the main arb page, I didn't interpret it or re-word it in any way. Thank you for your comments here :) --kizzle 18:24, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks, Kizzle; no biggie. BTW, if anyone thinks it would help, I would love to help BigDaddy or any other conservative who feels they are being persecuted learn how to play nice at Wikipedia.  Not sure if I have the time or the patience, but I'd love to help. Jdavidb 18:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The initial RfC filed against him was put on hold when Paul Klenk tried to mentor him, but despite his incredibly noble efforts, I don't think it had any effect. You're free to try though. --kizzle 19:03, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to ask for a signature of one of the arbitrators indicating that my comment above has been read, please.

Additionally, I am now more familiar with BigDaddy's case, and I'd like to state that the list of his alleged sockpuppets that I saw drawn up somewhere sounded ludicrous for several reasons, chiefly that their editing patterns did not match his at all. (I want to avoid making personal attacks, but honestly he doesn't sound as intelligent as the people on that list.) It almost sounds as if some people automatically assume all conservative new users must be the same person because surely there couldn't be that many of those nasty stupid conservatives in the world. In particular, I saw Barneygumble around here a long time ago and he was nothing like BigDaddy, last I checked. Jdavidb 14:19, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

To the Arbcom members
How much more do we have to put up with this clearly hostile user? Seriously. This is not because BD is a conservative, but because he's a highly aggressive user who does not know how to play nice with those he works with, and has even admitted he has been in this situation countless times before. I think I speak for an enormous amount of people when I say I'm personally sick of absorbing his vitriol. Something needs to be done, soon. For goodness sake, on an RfA filed against him because he personally attacks people, he called one of the co-signers a "brain surgeon"! --kizzle 18:12, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I wholeheartedly agree. I was feeling patient until I started seeing BigDaddy throwing around charges of racism today.  Remember, the point here is to protect Wikipedia, not the rights of one particularly troublesome and hostile editor.  Can any reasonable argument be made that BD has on net made a positive contribution to wikipedia?  No.  And I don't think that's going to change anytime soon.  Let him go play nicely on the Teletubbies page, not on pages where he has already ground his axe to a sliver. Derex @ 22:08, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Have you looked at his contributions? In almost one thousand edits, there is not one single article-space edit that is not to a political article.  NOT ONE.  BD is here for one reason, and one reason only, POV warrioring.  EVERY single other author on those pages — liberal, conservative, communist, or libertarian; newbie or old hand — has contributions elsewhere and lots of them. I've had it, I told him so. I'm done.  I'll be back when BD is gone. He just got blocked for a week, so cancel the melodramatic storm-out. Derex @ 00:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
User:Big Adamsky

Howdee. I, the Big Adamsky, am:

 * a multilingual university student of Cartography, Human Geography and International Relations

 * hooked on adventure tourism and ecotourism — particularly to remote islands, archipelagoes and peninsulas

 * a major contributor to these articles and the uploader of these images [[Image:Minor Barnstar.png|thumb|right|For all of your great (minor) edits, I award you the Minor Barnstar! --[[User:Khoikhoi|Khoikhoi]] 03:58, 10 February 2006 (UTC)]]

 * nostalgic about 1980s TV action cartoon series and German-style board games

 * moderately amused by WP:UA

Flags

 * Vexilla Mundi
 * Atlas géographique mondial
 * CyberFlag
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Caledonia
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Zealand
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Zealand
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Zealand
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Zealand
 * Proposal for a new flag for New Zealand
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia
 * Proposal for a new flag for Australia

Stats

 * GeoHive
 * Ethnologue
 * L'aménagement linguistique
 * Omniglot
 * WorldStatesmen
 * MoreOrLess: Heroes & killers of the 20th century
 * Gapminder

Maps

 * Monde diplomatique thematic maps
 * Watersheds of the World
 * Language maps

 *  Note that the e-mail address that I have provided is not one that I rush to check regularly, unless so advised.

…and now for some random dreamy/dubby ear candy name-dropping: Blue States | Boozoo Bajou | Massive Attack | Thievery Corporation | Millenia Nova | Mazzy Star \ Hope Sandoval | Emiliana Torrini | Afterlife | Bliss | Bent | Tosca | Haim Laroz | Gotan Project | Sneaker Pimps | Aqualung | Mono | Sandoz | Röyksopp | Samia Farah | Late Night Alumni | Faithless | Morcheeba | Zero 7 | Goldfrapp | Double Six

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

title: User:Big Adamsky


text:
London–Brabant Massif

The London–Brabant Massif or London–Brabant Platform is, in the tectonic structure of Europe, a structural high or massif that stretches from the Rhineland in western Germany across northern Belgium (in the province of Brabant) and the North Sea to the sites of East Anglia and the middle Thames in southern England.

The massif also occurs in the Belgian subsurface, where it is bounded to the northeast by the Roer Valley Graben that runs diagonally through Dutch Limburg.

The Midlands Microcraton (southeastern Wales and part of western England) is often considered part of the massif and to reflect this the names Wales–Brabant Massif, Wales–London–Brabant Massif and Wales–Brabant High are sometimes used.

The London–Brabant Massif is part of the former microcontinent Avalonia. To the south it borders the Rhenohercynian Zone of the Hercynian orogeny. To the northeast it is flanked by the Anglo-Dutch Basin in the subsurface of the North Sea.

At times in geologic history the London–Brabant Massif formed an island, which is called the London–Brabant Island.

Formation
The massif is composed of crystalline basement (metamorphic and igneous rocks) with Proterozoic to early Paleozoic ages. It was deformed and metamorphosed during the Cadomian orogeny (Ediacaran, about ) and Caledonian orogeny (Silurian, about ). This basement is almost everywhere overlain by younger sedimentary rocks, except for some places in the southwest of England and in Wales.

The continent Avalonia was until the Ordovician part of the large southern continent Gondwana, but then began drifting independently to lower latitudes. As it passed through the dry latitudes represented today by the Namib Desert1, it was eroded and the soils became laterite. The strata, particularly of the Precambrian are complex. Their continuity is also poorly understood because they are beyond the reach of most boreholes.

Carboniferous period
The period from which the island has exercised most economic influence on modern Europe was the Carboniferous. As the continent was drifting past the Equator, on the island's shores, there grew a rich tropical forest swamp. On the island's southern shore, it left the Dinantian, Namurian and Westphalian coal fields of France, Belgium and western Germany. See Aachener Revier (in German).

To its northwest, the thinner crust between it and the Market Weighton Axis was crumpled between the blocks leaving low ridges of wet land between strips of water such as the Widmerpool Gulf. On the wet land, the coal fields of Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire were deposited. These extend further east but are now at ever greater depth. At the modern east Yorkshire and north Lincolnshire coast for example, their upper surface is at about 2 km depth. These Carboniferous beds are part of a system linking with those of Westphalia, around the north side of the island. On the north Norfolk coast, the line of the Carboniferous shore roughly coincides with the modern one.2

The Permian and Triassic
As the continent drifted northwards, away from the Equator, through the latitudes represented today by the Sahara desert, the erosion was renewed. This time, the lateritic soils are represented by the New Red Sandstone and the red soils of Leicestershire and Rutland.

The early Permian was the time of the height of the Variscan earth movements as the crust to the south was crushed against the island. The great disturbances seen at the surface in Brittany, the Ardennes and the Rhineland also lie below the Paris Basin. They fade out in the gentler anticline of the downs and Weald of southern England which overlies the edge of the island. The axis of this anticline is normally called the northern Variscan front. However, the chalk of the downs is Upper Cretaceous, so the process continued well after the Permian. The point in the present context is that the stability of the island contrasts with the relatively unstable crust to its south, which was forced into a long mountain ridge.

To the north, economically important things were happening. Western Britain was pushed up as part of the Variscan Orogeny while the east of Britain, including the island began to subside leaving a broad basin, north of the island and south of Scandinavia. This formed a shallow sea in a very dry climate. Desert sands and salt basins were a result but there are also mudstones. This provided the alternating porous and impervious rocks which have trapped the gas escaping when the coal measures, below were subjected to geothermal heat. This has left a group of gas fields off the Norfolk coast. That is to say, off the coast of the island.

Rhaetic transgression
In the early Jurassic, the Rhaetic sea flooded much of the Permian plain. On the margin of the London–Brabant Island, the estuarine conditions which left the Lower Estuarine Series prevailed for a while before the sea rose so as to deposit the Lincolnshire limestones before falling again so that the Upper Estuarine Series was left. Again the sea rose to deposit the Blisworth Limestone, the Blisworth Clay and the Upper Jurassic clays.

The same general pattern occurred in France leaving the Paris Basin flooded from Anjou to Luxembourg.

Cretaceous
By the Cretaceous the island had sunk much further in relation to the sea level. Before the end of the period, the British end was buried in Upper Cretaceous chalk. This happened because the Pacific Ocean bed swelled up causing the world's seas to rise but also, the process released much carbon dioxide.

Modern existence
It is now best viewed as a block of dense crust floating deeply sunk into the mantle and overlain with less dense superficial rocks. It depresses the boundary of the crust and the mantle (Mohorovičić discontinuity, commonly Moho) to depths greater than 40 kilometres as against a figure at the top of the continental shelf of about thirty and less than fifteen below oceanic depths.3

The map shows that there is some tendency for such seismic activity as there is in the region to occur around the margin of the massif. It was into this pattern that the Dover Straits earthquake of 1580 and the 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake, the latter marked by an orange star, fell.

title: London–Brabant Massif


text:
Talk:List of United States senators from Michigan

re-sort alphabetically?
Since United States Congressional Delegations from Michigan has the Senators listed by year and class, are there any objections to turning this into an alphabetical listing? older ≠ wiser 20:53, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
Rhymefest

Che Armond Smith (born July 6, 1977), better known by his stage name Rhymefest, is an American rapper and songwriter from Chicago, Illinois. He is best known for his work with fellow Chicago rapper Kanye West, with writing credits on his songs including "Jesus Walks" (which won Best Rap Song) in 2004 and "New Slaves" in 2013. He also co-wrote "Glory", for Common and John Legend in 2014, which received a Golden Globe Award for Best Original Song and an Academy Award for Best Original Song.

As a recording artist, he signed to Mark Ronson's Allido Records, an imprint of J Records in 2006, where he released his debut album Blue Collar in July of that year.

Career
Born Che Smith in Chicago, Illinois, Rhymefest started off battle rapping at events such as JumpOff and ScribbleJam against acts like Eminem and Chalk. Smith co-wrote "Glory" alongside John Legend and Common, for the 2014 motion picture Selma. The song received the 2014 Golden Globe Award for Best Original Song and the 2014 Academy Award for Best Original Song. Che has expanded his gifts beyond the borders of music. The subject of the Showtime and Break Thru Films documentary, "In My Father's House", Rhymefest purchased the  childhood home of his estranged father only to find that he'd been homeless for most of Che's life, Rhymefest then embarks on a journey to reconnect and redeem their relationship. Rhymefest's film debut was in Emilio Estevez's 2018 film The Public. He played "Big George", starring alongside Alec Baldwin, Gabrielle Union, Taylor Shilling, Michael K. Williams, Christian Slater, and more. Rhymefest has revealed that he will be releasing an album soon titled Love Lessons Pt. 1. The track "OG Philosophy" featuring Black Thought and Raheem DeVaughn arrived in early 2020.

Politics
In 2006, Smith was invited to the British House of Commons to discuss hip-hop and policy with David Cameron. In October 2010, Smith announced his candidacy for Chicago's 20th ward alderman. He placed second in the February 22, 2011 election, and was defeated by incumbent Willie Cochran in the April 5, 2011 runoff election, getting 45.4% of the vote to Cochran's 54.6%.

In 2016, he hosted a "Truth & Reconciliation" event series to enhance awareness about gun violence in Chicago. He is running for an elected position as a member of the Chicago school board in the inaugural 2024 election for the post. He is running in the 10th district, which is located on Chicago's south side.

Art of Culture (formerly Donda's House)
Rhymefest is Executive Director and co-Founder of Art of Culture (formerly Donda's House), Inc. The organization was originally named after Kanye West's mother Donda West. Artists who were accepted into Donda's House include Hex Hectic.

Personal life
Rhymefest is Muslim. He has three children and is married to Heather Michele Smith.

Che Guevara namesake
Che Smith, named for the Marxist revolutionary Che Guevara, addressed the matter, stating: "'When you have a name, a real name, like Che, it's definitely something, whether you want to or not, something that you have to live up to. How could I be named Che and then do all songs about dancing in the club and who got the fattest ass? That would be an oxymoron to who I am. I think there's something very important in a name. So I think when we name ourselves and name our children, I think we have to think about what the future will look like. I named my son Solomon, and when people look at him they say, 'Oh, Solomon, the wise king,' and I think he's growing into that role. It's evident even in hip-hop. You see people who are Lil' this and Young that. What do they do? They act just like their name dictates.'"

Grammy Awards

 * rowspan="2"|2005
 * rowspan="2"|Jesus Walks (as songwriter)
 * Song of the Year
 * Nominated
 * Best Rap Song
 * Won
 * 2014
 * "New Slaves" (as songwriter)
 * Best Rap Song
 * Nominated
 * rowspan="2"|2016
 * rowspan="2"|Glory (as songwriter)
 * Best Rap Song
 * Nominated
 * Best Song Written for Visual Media
 * Won
 * Best Rap Song
 * Nominated
 * Best Song Written for Visual Media
 * Won
 * Won

Albums

 * 2006: Blue Collar
 * 2010: El Che
 * 2024: James & Nikki: A Conversation

Singles

 * 1996: "This Is How We Chill (Pts. 1 & 2)"
 * 2005: "Dirty Dirty" (Featuring Ol' Dirty Bastard)
 * 2006: "Brand New" (featuring Kanye West) #38 Ireland, #32 UK
 * 2006: "Dynomite (Going Postal)"
 * 2006: "Fever"
 * 2006: "Wanted"
 * 2007: "Angry Black Man on the Elevator" (featuring Lil Jon)
 * 2009: "Chicago"
 * 2024: "Creator" (featuring Brittney Carter and Rell Suma)
 * 2024: "Pop" (featuring EP Da Hellcat)

Mixtapes

 * 2004: Brand New
 * 2005: A Star Is Born, Vol. 1
 * 2006: Plugg City: City on My Back
 * 2008: Mark Ronson Presents: Man in the Mirror
 * 2009: El Che: The Manual Mixtape
 * 2010: Dangerous: 5-18
 * 2010: Man in the Mirror 2.0

title: Rhymefest


text:
Telki

Telki is a village near Budakeszi, in Hungary, some 10 km away from Budapest.

Twin towns

 * 🇮🇹 Messina, Italy

title: Telki


text:
Port Stanley Terminal Rail

The Port Stanley Terminal Rail (PSTR) is a heritage railway that passes over the historic tracks of The London and Port Stanley Railway (L&PS) between Port Stanley and St. Thomas, Ontario. The tourist trains began operating in 1983, after volunteers started maintaining the abandoned L&PS train corridor.

History
The first passenger train reached Port Stanley on July 5, 1856. Use of the line increased until 1943, when the end of gas rationing and the increased use of automobiles caused a slow decline in passenger traffic. On February 1, 1957, passenger service ended on the L&PS line.

Afterwards, the railway continued to carry freight traffic, especially between St. Thomas and London, Ontario. The rail section between St. Thomas and Port Stanley fell into disrepair and was finally abandoned in 1982 after a washout. When the line was officially abandoned, a group of railway preservationists created the Port Stanley Terminal Rail Inc. and purchased the rail to be used as a heritage railway. After rebuilding the tracks, the group finally received a Provincial railway charter to operate trains between the cities of St. Thomas and Port Stanley in 1987. This was the first charter issued in Ontario in several decades.

Recognition
In 2012, the Port Stanley Terminal Rail was inducted to the North America Railway Hall of Fame. The PSTR was recognized for its contribution to railroading as a "Community, Business, Government or Organization" in the "Local" category (pertaining specifically to the area in and around St. Thomas, Ontario.)

Present day
Currently, the railway has five historic diesel electric locomotives from the 1940s and 1950s and nine passenger cars.:
 * General Electric 25T locomotive - ex-Consolidated Sand and Gravel
 * Canadian Locomotive Company/Whitcomb 50 ton switcher locomotive - ex-Consolidated Sand and Gravel
 * General Electric 44T locomotive - ex-Greater Winnipeg Water District #103
 * General Electric 45T locomotive - ext-Zalev Brothers Company
 * Canadian Locomotive Company/Whitcomb 25 ton switcher locomotive - ex-Consolidated Sand and Gravel

Trains leave the Port Stanley railway station on most weekends (and daily during July and August except Monday and Tuesday) for an hour-long ride that ends up just south of St. Thomas. Additionally, a number of special train rides are scheduled throughout the year, like the Santa Express which runs in December and the Murder Mystery series. It runs seasonally as it does't run between mid-December and mid-April.

The PSTR railway is classified as a tourist railway with all passenger boarding done in Port Stanley.

The line is run and maintained through volunteer effort.

title: Port Stanley Terminal Rail


text:
Talk:Straits of Mackinac

StraitS?
I expected to find "Strait of Mackinac", singular. I see that one might consider the eastward path to the south of Bois Blanc Island to be a strait and the northward path to the west of Mackinac Island to be straits as well. But the article identifies "Straits of Mackinac" a waterway (singular), the one spanned by the bridge, separating Lakes Michigan and Huron. The passages around the islands are already squarely in Lake Huron, as are the islands around which they lead. Am I being too technical/literal? Or is there a missing clarification or detail that would be worth elaborating on in the article? Largoplazo (talk) 20:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Agreed!
It needs to be corrected. We went through this discussion for two years on the Strait of Gibraltar page and it took proving that the three countries that bordered the strait (Spain, Morocco, and Gibraltar) refer to it in the singular to get it fixed. On that note, most of the so-called "straits" in the world are, in fact, a singular strait. There are some (Danish Straits and Turkish Straits, for example) that qualify to be plural as there are two distinct straits with a larger body of water separating them. The misuse of Straits is so prevalent in the body of pages on Wikipedia that it will take a bot to correct all the errors in the many pages where it arises. CarlitosCorazon 10:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharleyHart (talk • contribs)

Width of Strait
The intro seems to contain contradictory information:

"The main strait flows under the Mackinac Bridge and connects two of the Great Lakes, Lake Michigan and Lake Huron. The main strait is 3 1⁄2 miles (5.6 kilometers) wide . . ." vs. "The straits are five miles (8 km) wide at their narrowest point, where they are spanned by the Mackinac Bridge." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:405:4A00:4430:A4C6:3E2A:76F1:B4CD (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Straits of Mackinac


text:
Longwang (disambiguation)

Longwang may refer to:
 * Dragon King, a god in Chinese folk religion
 * Typhoon Longwang, a tropical cyclone impacting China during the 2005 Pacific typhoon season

title: Longwang (disambiguation)


text:
Pahath-Moab

Pahath-moab (Hebrew "Pit of Moab") was the ancestor of a Judahite clan that returned from the Babylonian Exile and assisted in rebuilding Jerusalem. (Book of Ezra 2:6; 8:4; 10:30; Book of Nehemiah 3:11, 7:11, 10:14)

The meaning is most likely that this individual was held captive in Moab. Probably as evidenced from "Nebo" or "The Other Nebo" in Ezra and Nehemiah, there were these two captives in Moab (Ezra 2:29, 10:43; Nehemiah 7:33). Nebo is the name of a city of the Moabites (Is. 15:2, 46:1). Babylon had possession of the entire Earth, according to the Book of Daniel 2:38, so it is likely that when Cyrus the Great brought back the captives, there were these two residing in the land of Moab (Is. 44:28, 45:1; Ezra 1:2).

title: Pahath-Moab


text:
David Mann (songwriter)

David Mann (October 3, 1916 — March 1, 2002), also known as David Freedman, was an American songwriter of popular songs. His best-known songs are "There! I've Said It Again" (1945), popularized first by Vaughn Monroe and later by Bobby Vinton, "No Moon at All" (1947), recorded by Robert Goulet in (1963) and "In the Wee Small Hours of the Morning" (1955), recorded most notably by Frank Sinatra, but covered by many other artists over the decades.

Career
Mann was able to play the piano by ear, at the age of 4, and by age 13, he was playing around Philadelphia. He attended the Curtis Institute of Music. In late 1939, Mann moved to New York and became a Decca Records session musician. He was in Charley Spivak's orchestra until 1941.

During World War II, Mann joined the United States Army. Upon his discharge from the Army in 1945, they had the honor of placing Mann as personal pianist to President Truman. Mann worked on or appeared in the films: Twenty Grand, I Dood It, Four Jills and a Jeep, Pin-Up Girl, and, during his Artie Shaw days, Second Chorus.

Mann wrote the song "Somebody Bad Stole de Wedding Bell", recorded by Eartha Kitt between 1952 and 1954. The song was released as a B-side to her 1954 non-album single "Lovin' Spree". As a B-side to "Lovin' Spree", the single charted at number 20 on the current US Billboard music chart. Later, in 2006, the song was released as a CD bonus track to her album That Bad Eartha.

His most enduring composition was "In the Wee Small Hours of the Morning", written with Bob Hilliard. The song has over 500 cover versions to its credit, over 100 available today on iTunes. The song enjoys wide acclaim, and the Sinatra album has been considered the first 'concept album'. Jazz musicians love "No Moon At All," written with lyricist Redd Evans, which follows the baroque chord changes of Bach's Double Violin Concerto. One of Mann's hits "There I've Said it Again"—the Bobby Vinton version of 1963—was the last #1 in the United States before the British Invasion. It was knocked off the top spot by The Beatles' song "I Want to Hold Your Hand". Thereafter, his songwriting career was replaced by journalism, writing an op-ed for The Suburban Trends, a local NJ newspaper, for 32 years until his death.

David Mann died in March 2002 from complications due to pneumonia and kidney failure.

title: David Mann (songwriter)


text:
Talk:Fort Michilimackinac

Michilimackinac, NOT Michimilimackinac
Please don't change all of the occurrences of "Michilimackinac" to "Michimilimackinac"... mostly because it's completely incorrect. It's "Michilimackinac", as noted in the article's title and at ALL of the external links on the page, including those pointing to the official State of Michigan sites. I would consider such change as bordering on vandalism (or, best case, edits with no common sense -- after all, look at the title of the article!). Thanks. CBessert 22:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

HEHEHEHHE

Fort Mackinac
Is this the same article ? about the same topic ? Octopus-Hands 23:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

 * No, as the articles describe, Fort Michilimackinac is an earlier fort built by the French on the mainland near present-day Mackinaw City. Fort Mackinac was built a bit later by the British on Mackinac Island. older ≠ wiser 15:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation
How is Michilimackinac pronounced? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.185.253.158 (talk) 07:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fort Michilimackinac. 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/20120721095242/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=273&ResourceType=Site to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=273&ResourceType=Site

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) 11:56, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fort Michilimackinac


text:
Talk:Charter township

Size of board
The article states that the board of seven officials is composed of three specific officials and either two or four others. What happens if there are just two others — are there more specific officials, or are there just five officials total, or is it done otherwise? Regardless, this should be fixed by someone who knows more than I do. Nyttend 01:00, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I've updated this. A charter township must have seven board members. General law townships can have either five or seven board members. I cited an MTA publication for this. The relevant statutes are dispersed through several sections of the Michigan Compiled Law and suffer from the typical deficiencies of legalistic language. older ≠ wiser 01:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Proection against annexation
It's always been said that 'incorporating' a charter township allows greater protection against annexation by a city than, say, remaining a general law township, but it's never really explained why. And, the more I try to figure out why, the more I come to the conclusion that 'protection against annexation' may not actually exist. Can someone add or explain how simpling changing the number of members on a general law township's board and contracting out for services in any way protects against annexation by a city? --Criticalthinker (talk) 23:26, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

The Charter Township Act of 1947
In the external links section is supposedly to the text for the "The Charter Township Act of 1947". When you click on the link, however, it simply takes you to the 'search' page of the legislative website. With no idea of the number of the original act, there is no way to find the text. Can someone fix this? --Criticalthinker (talk) 23:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Charter township. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070507190136/http://www.michigantownships.org:80/downloads/general_law_vs_charter_packet_feb_2005.pdf to http://www.michigantownships.org/downloads/general_law_vs_charter_packet_feb_2005.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:21, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Charter township


text:
Tilbrook

Tilbrook is a village and civil parish in the Huntingdonshire district of Cambridgeshire, England, approximately 10 mi west of Huntingdon and 24 mi north-west of Cambridge. Though administered as part of Cambridgeshire, the village historically belonged to Bedfordshire, being situated 12 mi north of Bedford. The parish had a population of 256 in 2021.

Government
As a civil parish, Tilbrook has a parish council. The parish council is elected by the residents of the parish who have registered on the electoral roll; the parish council is the lowest tier of government in England. A parish council is responsible for providing and maintaining a variety of local services including allotments and a cemetery; grass cutting and tree planting within public open spaces such as a village green or playing fields. The parish council reviews all planning applications that might affect the parish and makes recommendations to Huntingdonshire District Council, which is the local planning authority for the parish. The parish council also represents the views of the parish on issues such as local transport, policing and the environment. The parish council raises its own tax to pay for these services, known as the parish precept, which is collected as part of the Council Tax.

Tilbrook was in Bedfordshire until 30 September 1896, when it was transferred to Huntingdonshire. From 1965, the village was part of the new administrative county of Huntingdon and Peterborough. Then in 1974, following the Local Government Act 1972, Tilbrook became a part of the county of Cambridgeshire.

The second tier of local government is Huntingdonshire District Council which is a non-metropolitan district of Cambridgeshire and has its headquarters in Huntingdon. Huntingdonshire District Council has 52 councillors representing 29 district wards. Huntingdonshire District Council collects the council tax, and provides services such as building regulations, local planning, environmental health, leisure and tourism. Tilbrook is a part of the district ward of Kimbolton and Staughton and is represented on the district council by one councillor. District councillors serve for four-year terms following elections to Huntingdonshire District Council.

For Tilbrook the highest tier of local government is Cambridgeshire County Council which has administration buildings in Cambridge. The county council provides county-wide services such as major road infrastructure, fire and rescue, education, social services, libraries and heritage services. Cambridgeshire County Council consists of 69 councillors representing 60 electoral divisions. Tilbrook is part of the electoral division of Brampton and Kimbolton and is represented on the county council by one councillor.

At Westminster Tilbrook is in the parliamentary constituency of Huntingdon, and elects one Member of Parliament (MP) by the first past the post system of election. Tilbrook is represented in the House of Commons by Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative). Jonathan Djanogly has represented the constituency since 2001. The previous member of parliament was John Major (Conservative) who represented the constituency between 1983 and 2001.

Population
In the period 1801 to 1901 the population of Tilbrook was recorded every ten years by the UK census. During this time the population was in the range of 219 (the lowest was in 1801) and 392 (the highest was in 1881).

From 1901, a census was taken every ten years with the exception of 1941 (due to the Second World War). The population at the 2011 census included Covington and was recorded as being 370.

All population census figures from report Historic Census figures Cambridgeshire to 2011 by Cambridgeshire Insight.

In 2011, the parish covered an area of 1678 acre and the population density of Tilbrook in 2011 was 97.3 persons per square mile (37.6 per square kilometre).

title: Tilbrook


text:
Irrigation Way

Irrigation Way is a major rural road that runs approximately 85 km through the Murrumbidgee Irrigation Area in south western New South Wales, Australia.

Route
Irrigation Way commences at the intersection with Newell Highway in Narrandera and heads in a north-westerly direction for 29 km before reaching Leeton, continuing another 52 km before ending at the intersection with Kidman Way in Griffith. The road is an important link between the three towns as it is a very productive farming region. Irrigation Way provides a direct route between the national highway network and Griffith. This complements the two state routes that pass through Griffith. The route is most important in linking Leeton to other regions of the state as its only major road.

History
The passing of the Main Roads Act of 1924 through the Parliament of New South Wales provided for the declaration of Main Roads, roads partially funded by the State government through the Main Roads Board (later the Department of Main Roads, and eventually Transport for NSW). With the subsequent passing of the Main Roads (Amendment) Act of 1929 to provide for additional declarations of State Highways and Trunk Roads, Main Road 254 was declared on 5 December 1929, from Griffith via Leeton, Yanco and Narrandera (continuing south to the intersection with Trunk Road 58, later Sturt Highway, at Gillenbah, and north to Hillston).

The Department of Main Roads, which had succeeded the MRB in 1932, declared Trunk Road 80 on 16 March 1938, from Griffith via Leeton to the intersection with State Highway 17 (later Newell Highway), in Narrendera (and continuing westwards via Hillston to Mossgiel), subsuming the alignment of Main Road 254 between Narrandera and Hillston; Main Road 254 was re-declared from Yenda to the intersection with Trunk Road 80 at Wumbulgal as a result.

The passing of the Roads Act of 1993 updated road classifications and the way they could be declared within New South Wales. Under this act, Irrigation Way today retains its declaration as part of Main Road 80, from Narrandera to Griffith.

The route was allocated State Route 94 in 1974 between Yoogali and Griffith. With the conversion to the newer alphanumeric system in 2013, this was replaced with route B94.

Towns
Narrandera: Irrigation Way begins off the Newell Highway near the bridge over the Murrumbidgee River and 2 km from the junction with the Sturt Highway. The Narrandera Airport is also located on the Irrigation Way, 10 km from Narrandera. Irrigation Way reaches the Shire of Leeton shortly after the airport.

Leeton: Irrigation Way begins in the Leeton Shire between Narrandera Airport and the turn off to Rockdale Beef. After travelling approximately 18 km the small village of Yanco is reached. The Yanco CBD is located on Irrigation Way as Main Street. Leeton is located 3 km from Yanco. Leeton's CBD is also found on Irrigation Way. On the southern approach to town there are schools, offices and residential properties before the main streets are reached. On the northern side of town large commercial and industrial properties are found before exiting Leeton. The villages of Wamoon and Whitton are bypassed before entering the City of Griffith Local Government Area.

Griffith: Irrigation Way is short in Griffith. It runs approximately 20 km from Leeton, where it reaches the village of Widgelli before it passes through Yoogali at its junction with Burley Griffin Way, and to eventually end in central Griffith.

title: Irrigation Way


text:
Talk:Michigan Senate

'Unicameral Michigan'
I added a small blurb about the orginaization, Im reluctant to add a link however, as do prevent it from becomming an endorsment. Keeperoftheseal 01:17, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I added the link for Unicameral, although just to the artical on Unicameralism :)Karrade 01:54, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Senate michigan.jpg
The image Image:Senate michigan.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --21:13, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Edit war
You cannot just keep reverting my original edit. There is nothing wrong with this article. Just because you don't like the fact that someone is correcting your inaccuracies, poor grammar and other mistakes. I removed a plethora of mistakes, which you keep trying to re-publish. Please follow Wikipedia rules and stop engaging in this edit war.75.129.106.189 (talk) 15:50, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * As with the Michigan House of Representatives article, you need to explain what is it you're arguing about in this article. This is a talk page for making suggestions and specific requests — not just pointing out what someone else might be doing wrong. If there is an accuracy dispute, please explain more appropriately and others will be glad to give assistance and make corrections in the event that another editor is wrong. —  ♣  №tǒŖïøŭş  4lĭfė   ♫   ♪  19:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

President Pro Tempore
Could there be some mention of how officers are chosen, particularly the president pro tempore? I think i'd heard in passing that it's usually the longest-serving state senator of the majority party, but I have nothing to back that up. I've tried searching the state constitution concerning how legislative officers are chosen, but couldn't find anything on the president pro temp aside. If someone else could find the senate rules on this, that would be great. The other officers are kind of obvious in that their caucus picks them, but I'm still unsure of how the president pro temp is chosen. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Michigan Senate


text:
Frogbit

Frogbit or frog's bit is a common name for several plants in the family Hydrocharitaceae and may refer to:
 * Hydrocharis morsus-ranae – European frogbit
 * Limnobium laevigatum – Amazon frogbit, South American frogbit

title: Frogbit