Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Template:Liberal

2007-03-27T05:46:50Z

Frijole:

{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: #FFCCCC;"
|-
|align="center"|[[Image:Stop_hand.svg|50px|Warning]]
|align="center" width="100%"|'''Warning!''' Please do not edit articles to include a liberal bias, as you appear to have done [{{{rev}}} here]. This behavior is counter to the [[Rules|Rules of Conservapedia]].
|}
[[Category:Warned Users]]

<noinclude>

==Usage==

<nowiki>{{subst:User:Frijole/Template:Liberal|rev=linktorevision}}</nowiki>

To get a link to the revision that includes the liberal edit you wish to call attention to, open the "History" link in a new window (usually right-click on the History tab, and click on "Open in a new window"), then right-click and "Copy link" to the revision in question.

</noinclude>

Robert Byrd

2007-03-27T00:30:19Z

Frijole: only needs one stub template, and I expanded it some more

'''Robert Byrd''' (born 1917) is a Democratic Senator from [[West Virginia]]. He is currently the oldest and longest-serving member of [[Congress]], [[President pro tempore]] of the US Senate, and is the longest-serving [[Senator]] in history, having been first elected in 1959.

During the 1940s, he was involved in the [[Ku Klux Klan]] where he reached the rank of [[Exalted Cyclops]], the leader of the local chapter of the organization.<ref>Pianin, Eric. [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/18/AR2005061801105_pf.html A Senator's Shame: Byrd, in His New Book, Again Confronts Early Ties to KKK]. Washington Post, 2005-06-19, pp. A01</ref> He repeatedly expressed his desire for the Klan's to expand to its previous size and power, once remarking in a letter that "The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia" and "in every state in the nation." <ref>King, Colbert I. [http://www.pulitzer.org/year/2003/commentary/works/king2.html Sen. Byrd: The view from Darrell's barbershop], Washington Post, March 2, 2002</ref> His involvement was as short-lived as it was impassioned, however, and by the 1950s, he was no longer involved with the organization.

He is third in line to the [[President of the United States|Presidency]] behind [[Vice President of the United States|Vice President]] [[Dick Cheney]] and [[Speaker of the United States House of Representatives|Speaker]] [[Nancy Pelosi]].

==References==
<references />

{{stub}}

Template:Liberal

2007-03-26T23:52:28Z

Frijole:

{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: #FFCCCC;"
|-
|align="center"|[[Image:Stop_hand.svg|50px|Warning]]
|align="center" width="100%"|'''Warning!''' If you continue to edit with a liberal bias, as you did [{{{rev}}} here], counter to the principles of Conservapedia, you may be blocked from editing for a period of time, or banned.
|}
[[Category:Warned Users]]

<noinclude>

==Usage==

<nowiki>{{subst:User:Frijole/Template:Liberal|rev=linktorevision}}</nowiki>

To get a link to the revision that includes the liberal edit you wish to call attention to, open the "History" link in a new window (usually right-click on the History tab, and click on "Open in a new window"), then right-click and "Copy link" to the revision in question.

</noinclude>

Template:Liberal

2007-03-26T23:46:21Z

Frijole:

{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: #FFCCCC;"
|-
|align="center"|[[Image:Stop_hand.svg|50px|Warning]]
|align="center" width="100%"|'''Warning!''' If you continue to edit with a liberal bias, as you did [{{{1}}} here], counter to the principles of Conservapedia, you may be blocked from editing for a period of time, or banned.
|}
[[Category:Warned Users]]

<noinclude>

==Usage==

<nowiki>{{subst:User:Frijole/Template:Liberal|linktorevision}}</nowiki>

To get a link to the revision that includes the liberal edit you wish to call attention to, open the "History" link in a new window (usually right-click on the History tab, and click on "Open in a new window"), then right-click and "Copy link" to the revision in question.

</noinclude>

Template:Liberal

2007-03-26T22:50:00Z

Frijole: New page: {| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="border: 1px solid #CC9999; background-color: #FFCCCC;" |- |align="center"|Warning |align="center" width="100%"|'''Wa...

File:Stop hand.svg

2007-03-26T22:45:35Z

Frijole: {| style="background-color: transparent" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" |- |  {| align="center" style="width:80%; background-color:#f0

{| style="background-color: transparent" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
|-
| 
{| align="center" style="width:80%; background-color:#f0f0f0; border:2px solid #aaaaaa; padding:5px;"
| style="text-align:center" | '''''[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mets501 Mets501], the creator of this work,''' published it under the following licences:''
|---
| 
{| style="background-color: transparent" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0"
|-
| 
{| style="margin: 0.5em auto; width: 80%; background-color: #f8f8f8; border: 2px solid #e0e0e0; padding: 5px"
|-
| ''Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the '''GNU Free Documentation License''', Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled "[http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/COPYING Text of the GNU Free Documentation License]."''
|}
|}

{| style="margin: 0.5em auto; text-align: center; width: 80%; background-color: #f8f8f8; border: 2px solid #e0e0e0; padding: 5px"
|-
| ''[[Media:{{PAGENAME}}|This file]] is licensed under the '''Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike''' license versions [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/ 2.5], [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ 2.0], and [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0/ 1.0].''
|} ''You may select the licence of your choice.''
|}
|}

Battle of Gettysburg

2007-03-26T18:06:38Z

Frijole: replaced image

Battle of Hampton Roads

2007-03-26T18:06:24Z

Frijole: replaced the image

American Civil War

2007-03-26T18:06:10Z

Frijole: replaced image

{| border="1" align="right" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" width="250" style="margin-left:5px"
|align="center" colspan="2"|[[Image:Cwlogo.png|200px]]
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: white; height: 30px; background: navy no-repeat scroll top left;"|American Civil War (Union)
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: white; height: 30px; background: gray no-repeat scroll top left;"|War of Northern Aggression (Southern)
|-
|Begun
|April 12, 1861
|-
|Ended
|April 9, 1865
|-
|Casualties
|970,000
|-
|Total dead
|620,000
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: white; height: 30px; background: navy no-repeat scroll top left;"|United States of America
|-
|President
|[[Abraham Lincoln]]
|-
|Secretary of War
|Edwin M. Stanton
|-
|Secretary of the Navy
|Gideon Welles
|-
|Secretary of State
|William Seward
|-
!colspan="2" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: gray no-repeat scroll top left;"|Confederate States of America
|-
|President
|[[Jefferson Davis]]
|-
|Secretary of War
|Leroy Pope Walker, Judah P. Benjamin, George W. Randolph, James Seddon, John C. Breckinridge
|-
|Secretary of the Navy
|Stephan Mallory
|-
|Secretary of State
|Robert Toombs, Robert M.T. Hunter, Judah P. Benjamin
|}
The '''American Civil War''' was a conflict which took place from 1861 to 1865, involving the government of the [[United States of America]] and eleven southern states which seceded from the Union and formed their own government called the [[Confederate States of America]]. The worst war ever fought in American history, it involved casualties of nearly a million soldiers and civilians, roughly three percent of the country's total population.

==Names==
The American Civil War has been called by other titles: the '''War Between the States''' and the '''War of Northern Aggression''' are popular titles in the South, as is the informal title '''The Lost Cause'''. Officially, the United States government has called it the '''War of the Rebellion'''. The term "civil war" is most accurate, as it not only involved state against state from a common country, but the splitting of families as well; fathers would take sides against sons, and brother would fight against brother in many battles. In one sad case, Private Wesley Culp of the 2nd Virginia Regiment would die for the Confederacy at the [[Battle of Gettysburg]], killed on his father's farm. (TL 15, pp. 154-155)

==Prelude to war==
===Description of the North prior to 1860===
The chief characteristic of the North was its industrialization, which was rapid. Plants to manufacture metal goods sprang up almost as fast as they were invented, and after manufacture they spread quickly. One example was [[John Deere]], who in 1840 was manufacturing a new stainless-steel plow that he had invented barely three years before; by 1848 the plows were selling at the rate of a thousand a year. By 1857, Deere and his partner had expanded with the manufacture of so much farm equipment that the Middle West was made the country's greatest wheat-producing area. Farm equipment also included the first examples of steam-powered plows, and in 1859 there were contests as to who could build and deploy the best plow. One such plow at a contest at Freeport, Illinois caused an official committee to declare the machine could "plow 25 acres a day at 62.5 cents an acre" versus a normal manual charge of $2.50 an acre. (Nevins, pg 166-168)

Inventions were not limited to farming. Locomotives, sewing machines, shoe peggers, reapers, augers, turbines, hydraulics, power looms, rotary presses, and more seemingly raced out of factories. Standardization was also an American invention, meaning replacement parts could be made and ordered to replace something broken within the machine instead of replacing the machine itself, as Connecticut's [[Samuel Colt]] first demonstrated with his new revolver. And to keep up with the exporting demand, Northern shipyards produced so many ships that they threatened to eclipse their chief rival, Great Britain. (TL 1, pg 18)

The North was also a melting pot of immigration. Northern cities were crowded and boisterous, and expanding rapidly. New York's population had jumped from 515,000 to 814,000 in the 1850's; Chicago's had gone from its 1837 incorporation with barely more than 4,000 people to over 112,000 by 1860. (TL 1, pg 16)

===Description of the South prior to 1860===
The South was largly agrarian. A Southern boast, "Cotton is king!" became very true by the 1850's, as cotton was grown, harvested, and shipped to market in vast quantities. The number of bales in 1849 was 2 million; by 1859 it had jumped to 5.7 million, amounting to more than half of all American exports and seven-eighths of the total amount of cotton in the world. (TL 1, pg 10)

Southern life was set by a landed gentry, the small minority of well-to-do planters. They practiced a cultivated chivalry, kindness towards those of inferior status, a code of honor among equals, and a gallantry towards women. The money made from cotton was spent on goods manufactured in the North, as well as imports from Europe. They had a taste for well-bred horses, quality firearms, foxhounds, and the belles from fine Southern families. And they also studied astudiously the arts of war, often spending large sums of money to send themselves or their sons to military schools. One Mississippi planter, Jefferson Davis, remarked that only in the South "did a gentlemen go to a military academy who did not intend to follow the profession of arms." (TL 1, pg 12)

But the South had several serious drawbacks. Its population at 1860 was roughly 9 million people, of whom more than 3 million were slaves, versus more than 21 million in the North. There were only 18,000 manufacturing plants of any kind in the South, as opposed to the North's more than 100,000. Of these, only two were capable of producing rolled iron, one which produced gunpowder, and none capable of producing firearms; there were twenty-seven gun manufacturers in Massachusetts alone. More than 70% of all railroad mileage was north of the Ohio River; the South had the remainder.

===Slavery===
Before the Civil War, the individual states, particularly in the South, shared a belief that each state was sovereign. Sovereignty included jurisdiction over, and the handling of, each state's affairs, which invariably included their own public and private institutions.

Yet the "peculiar institution" cited more often than anything else in defending states' rights was the Southern institution of slavery.

===Political machinations and compromises===
The '''Missouri Compromise of 1820''' allowed for the entry of Maine into the Union as a free state, and Missouri as a slave state. It was further agreed that slavery was to be excluded from territory north of the 36°30′ parallel, or the remaining western territories. Before admission could be granted to Missouri a clause in the state's constitution provoked controversy: the exclusion of "free negroes and mulattoes". Under Whig Henry Clay's influence in the U.S. senate, an act of admission was passed, upon condition that the controversial exclusionary clause should "never be construed to authorize the passage of any law" impairing the privileges and immunities of free citizens. The compromise seemed deliberately ambiguous in that it could be interpreted to indicate that free blacks and mulattos did not qualify as United States citizens, which would be put to direct test years later with a slave named Dred Scott. [http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Missouri.html]

Another crisis arose from the request of the California Territory to be admitted to the Union as a free state; this was complicated by territory acquired in the southwest as a result of the [[Mexican War]] of 1848 and whether to extend slavery there. An omnibus bill drafted by Henry Clay called the '''Compromise of 1850''' tried to give satisfaction to the southern states in addition to California's admission: the settlement of the Texas-New Mexico border dispute; the slavery question open for voting via popular sovereignty in the Utah and New Mexico territories as they were organized; the end of slave trading in the District of Columbia; and tough requirements concerning runaway slaves. [http://blueandgraytrail.com/event/Compromise_of_1850]

All five measures were enacted in September, 1850 as a result of the efforts and support of Democratic senator [[Stephen A. Douglas]] and Whig senator [[Daniel Webster]], and were accepted by moderates throughout the country as well as postponing Souther secession for another decade. But the seeds of discord were planted; the precident of popular sovereignty, championed by Douglas as the way for the public to vote whether or not they wanted slavery in their territories, led to the Kansas territory agitating for a similar provision. And the [[Fugitive Slave Act]] that was a part of the Compromise was so bitterly condemned that many moderates who have ignored slavery in the past became determined opponents to any extention of the institution into the territories. Many would risk jail rather than turn over runaway slaves to their owners as required by the new laws.

The '''[[Kansas–Nebraska Act]]''' (May 30, 1854), sponsored by Douglas, provided for the territorial organization of Kansas and Nebraska, using his principle the idea of popular sovereignty. Douglas had written the act in an effort to slow or halt the sectarianism over slavery's extension, but the Kansas-Nebraska Act merely increased the flames, and was attacked by free-soil and abolitionists as a capitulation to those who supported slavery. The Whig Party, ineffective in preventing it, largely disintegrated, and the Republican Party was born and soon became a viable political organization opposed to territorial expansion of slavery. Unfortunately on the heels of the act a migration of those for and against slavery would leave Missouri and seek to influence elections in the Kansas Territory, the result of which became a short conflict known as [[Bleeding Kansas]], culminating in the May 21, 1856 sack of Lawrence, Kansas by pro-slavery men, and a massacre of a family a few days later by an abolitionist force led by a religious fanatic named [[John Brown]]. [http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/kansas.html]

===Dred Scott decision===
Dred Scott was a slave owned by an Army physician who was transferred to the state of Wisconsin, a free state, for several years before a transfer to Missouri, a slave state. Scott sued on the grounds that his residence in a free state where slavery was illegal made him free. After a series of unsuccessful lawsuits, Scott appealed to the United States Supreme Court, where in 1856, Chief Justice Roger B. Taney delivered the majority opinion in ''Dred Scott vs. Sanford'':
*Blacks were not entitled to citizenship according to the U.S. Constitution.
*Blacks were not entitled to freedom under the Ordinance of 1797 while within the area of the Northwest Territory, of which Wisconsin was a part.
*The Missouri Compromise of 1820 prohibiting slavery north of Missouri and in free states was voided.
What the Dred Scott decision meant was any slave could be taken anywhere in the Union without fear that the owner of the slave would lose his property; a slave was private property, Taney stated, and according to the Fifth Amendment could not be taken from the owner without due process. [http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=60&invol=393]

The decision further frictionalized North/South relations, as a stunned North realized that free states had to support the institution of slavery.

===Emergence of Lincoln===
The Kansas-Nebraska Act caused much opposition in the country and led to the collapse of the Whig Party as an effective political organization. Many former Whigs, whose beliefs included the abolishment of slavery, flocked to the newly-formed [[Republican Party]]; their number would include a lawyer from Illinois who used the act to jump back into politics after a five-year absence, Abraham Lincoln.

Lincoln launched his campaign for the Senate seat held by Douglas at the Republican State Convention in Springfield on June 16, 1858. The speech he gave has been called the "House Divided" speech, after the opening lines:

:''If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could better judge what to do, and how to do it. We are now far into the fifth year since a policy was initiated with the avowed object, and confident promise, of putting an end to slavery agitation. Under the operation of that policy, that agitation has not only not ceased, but has constantly augmented. In my opinion, it will not cease, until a crisis shall have been reached and passed. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing, or all the other. Either the opponents of slavery will arrest the further spread of it, and place it where the public mind shall rest in the belief that it is in the course of ultimate extinction; or its advocates will push it forward, till it shall become alike lawful in all the States, old as well as new -- North as well as South.'' [http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/divided.htm]

===Raid on Harpers Ferry===
During the spring of 1858 John Brown held a meeting in Ontario between blacks and whites in which he stated his intentions to form a stronghold in the mountains between Virginia and Maryland for escaped slaves, even going so far as to adopt his own provisional constitution for the United States, which his group adopted. Several prominent Boston abolitionists also gave him financial and moral support.

By summer, 1859, Brown was in a rented farmhouse in Maryland, across the river from the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, Virginia; with him was an armed band of sixteen whites and five blacks. On the night of October 16, he raided the armoury and taken some sixty of the area's leading men as hostages, and hoped that slaves would get word of his forming an "army of emancipation", escape, and fight with him to liberate their fellow slaves. For the next thiry hours he and his men held out against the local militia, but on the following morning a small force of United States Marines led by Army colonel [[Robert E. Lee]] had quickly broken into the arsenal building, wounding Brown, and killing two of his sons and ten other followers. He was tried for murder, slave insurrection, and treason, and at the end he was convicted and hanged. The day he was to die he spoke no last words, merely handing a note to a guard on which he had written a last, prophetic statement: ''"I, John Brown, am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood."'' (TL 1, pp. 70-89)

===1860 Presidential campaign===
==1861==
===Secession of the Southern states===
===Ft. Sumter===

==References==
*Time-Life Books ''The Civil War'', vol. 1 (''Brother Against Brother''), Time Inc, New York (1983)
*Time-Life Books ''The Civil War'', vol. 15 (''Gettysburg''), Time Inc, New York (1983)
*Nevins, Allan. ''Ordeal of the Union: A House Dividing'', Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, (1947)

==Links==
===The Official Records of the War of the Rebellion===
*[http://cdl.library.cornell.edu/moa/moa_browse.html Official Records, from Cornell University]
*[http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/sources/records/default.cfm?CFID=2953054&CFTOKEN=64723065&jsessionid=de3014246f1a3c587075TR Official Records, from eHistory.com]
===General===
*[http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/civil_war_maps Library of Congress Civil War map collection]
*[http://www.civil-war.net The Civil War Homepage]
*[http://www.pbs.org/civilwar The PBS/Ken Burns documentary]
*[http://www.historyplace.com/civilwar The History Place]
*[http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/misc/civilwar/civilwar.htm Civil War at a Glance; US Interior Department]
*[http://www.civilwarhome.com Shotgun's home of the American Civil War]
*[http://www.cwc.lsu.edu US Civil War Center, from Louisiana State University]
*[http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/ndlpcoop/nhihtml/cwnyhshome.html Civil War Treasures, from New York Historical Society]
===Prelude to war===
*[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=60&invol=393 Full text of the Dred Scott v. Sandford]
*[http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/Missouri.html Missouri Compromise]
*[http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/ourdocs/kansas.html Kansas-Nebraska act]
*[http://blueandgraytrail.com/event/Compromise_of_1850 Compromise of 1850]
*[http://www.usconstitution.net/fslave.html Text of the Fugitive Slave Law]
===Emergence of Lincoln===
*[http://www.historyplace.com/lincoln/divided.htm Lincoln's "House Divided" speech]

===1860 Presidential Campaign===
*[http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/votes/1853_1869.html#1860 Federal Register, 1860 election results]

[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Civil War]]

File:Cwlogo.png

2007-03-26T18:05:12Z

Frijole: replacement for :Image:CWLogo.jpg, vector-ized and cleaned up. ==Copyright Notice== {| border="1" | left right This file has been uploaded by frijole. This content, as well as all contributi

replacement for [[:Image:CWLogo.jpg]], vector-ized and cleaned up.

==Copyright Notice==
{| border="1"
| [[Image:Info.png|left]] [[Image:ccbyncsa.png|right]] This file has been uploaded by [[User:frijole|frijole]]. This content, as well as all contributions by this user, is covered by a '''Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike US''' license. This has important ramifications for your use or reuse of this material. See the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ license page] for more information.
|}

Wikipedia

2007-03-26T16:28:30Z

Frijole:

'''Wikipedia''' is a free-content online [[encyclopedia]] established by [[Jimbo Wales]] (with substantial help from [[Larry Sanger]]) on January 15, 2001. It currently has over 6 million articles, written in 250 languages<ref>[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias List of Wikipedias - Wikimedia]</ref>, including over 1,600,000 articles in the English version. [[Conservapedia]] uses the wiki program made popular by Wikipedia. Content on Wikipedia is under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), and anyone can add to or edit the content on Wikipedia.

Initially, Wikipedia was hosted on servers operated by Bomis Incorporated, a search portal funded by Jimbo Wales.<ref>The Bomis portal has been criticized as "pornographic"</ref> Then in 2003, Jimbo Wales created the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation with himself as board president, to oversee the day-to-day operation of Wikipedia.

==Seigenthaler Hoax and Reaction of Wikipedia Editors==
In May 2005, an anonymous user created a Wikipedia article on John Seigenthaler Sr, a journalist and an assistant to former attorney general Robert F. Kennedy that stated:<blockquote>
John Seigenthaler Sr. was the assistant to Attorney General Robert Kennedy in the early 1960s. For a short time, he was thought to have been directly involved in the Kennedy assassinations of both John, and his brother, Bobby. Nothing was ever proven.
</blockquote>
and
<blockquote>
John Seigenthaler moved to the Soviet Union in 1971, and returned to the United States in 1984. He started one of the country's largest public relations firms shortly thereafter.
</blockquote>
In September 2005, a friend of Seigenthaler's discovered the Wikipedia entry and alerted Seigenthaler, whom then contacted the Wikimedia foundation to have the article corrected, however the false biography had remained on Wikipedia for many months.
Wikipedia critic Daniel Brandt later discovered the prepetrator of the prank was Brian Chase, an acquaintance of Seigenthaler Sr.<ref>http://www.journalism.cf.ac.uk/2006/online/index.php?id=parse-195-0-0-251&article=336&author=India+Camm</ref> John Seigenthaler Sr later published an article in ''USA Today'' on the whole affair.<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-11-29-wikipedia-edit_x.htm</ref>

Instead of being apologetic, Wikipedia editors criticized Seigenthaler afterwards on a Wikipedia talk page for publicly complaining of the falsehoods about him:<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/02/12/bias_sabotage_haunt_wikipedias_free_world/?page=3</ref>
:"Mr. Seigenthaler's attitude and actions are reprehensible and ill-formed," said one comment. "[He] has the responsibility to learn about his own name and how it is being applied and used, as any celebrity does on the Internet and the world-at-large. Besides, if there is an error whether large or small, he can correct it on Wikipedia. Everyone fails to understand that logic." Another wrote: "Rather than fixing the article himself, he made a legal threat. He's causing Wikipedia a lot of trouble, on purpose."

The Siegenthaler scandal was originally billed as a "hoax", then "controversy" and finally downgraded in its stable version to "incident". Despite the damage to an innocent person and embarassment to Wikipedia's credibilty as a viable source, the Siegenthaler scandal is considered by many internal Administrators as "the best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia" <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Seigenthaler%2C_Sr.#The_best_thing_that_ever_happened_to_Wikipedia Talk:John Seigenthaler Sr.#The best thing that ever happened to Wikipedia], retrived 23 March 2007.</ref> catapulting it <ref>[http://wikipediareview.com/lofiversion/index.php?t1100.html Wikipedia: A Nightmare Of Libel and Slander], Joel Leyden, Israel News Agency, 8 May 2006.</ref> from the top 50 to the top 10 most visited websites.

==Essjay Scandal==
In January 2007, Wikipedia critic Daniel Brandt discovered that a prominent Wikipedia administrator, bureaucrat and arbitrator nicknamed Essjay has lied <ref>[http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/essjay.html Essjay/Archive/52 recovered by Brandt for posterity]</ref> on Wikipedia and in phone interviews with ''The New Yorker'' magazine about his age, job, background, and academic credentials<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6423659.stm</ref>. Essjay, who later identified himself as Ryan Jordan and who was an employee at Wikia Inc. funded by Jimbo Wales, had claimed to be a 40 year old homosexual, holding doctoral degrees in theology and canon law and is a tenured professor at a private university; but he was in fact a 24 years old community college dropout [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=2778&view=findpost&p=22351] from Kentucky. This fraud was reported by ABC, BBC and many other major news organizations. Jimbo Wales upon learning of this incident, stated: "I regard it as a pseudonym and I don’t really have a problem with it."<ref>http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/07/31/060731fa_fact</ref>

The first public notice occured on Wikipedia Review, a critic's forum frequented by Brandt and several other prominent Wikipedians, including many who have been blocked from editing Wikipedia. Brandt pointed out as early as July 2006 [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=2778&view=findpost&p=12701] that "something... doesn't add up" regarding Essjay's claim of being a college professor despite editing Wikipedia as much as 16 hours per day. One of the site's administrators posted on Jan. 11, 2007 regarding Essjay's hiring by Wikia after noticing that Jordan's "Essjay" account on Uncyclopedia (a Wikia-owned site) had been changed to include the "Staff" reference, normally given only to paid Wikia employees. The "Essjay" user page on Wikia had been posted, along with the name "Ryan Jordan," on Jan. 7, 2007 - with no explanation given for why Essjay would leave a tenured faculty position to work as a Community Manager for Wikia. The situation quickly became the subject of increasing speculation by the Wikipedia Review forum members, of whom Brandt was the most skeptical.

Later, the same administrator posted further details [http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=2778&view=findpost&p=20992] of discrepancies between Jordan's Wikia user page and his Wikipedia user page on January 19th, after Jordan added still more personal-background information to his Wikia user page that bore little similarity to the credentials he had claimed on Wikipedia since April of 2005.

==Daniel Brandt controversy==
The Daniel Brandt biographical entry was created by SlimVirgin on 28 September 2005. On two occasions, once prior and once after, SlimVirgin stated she did not consider Daniel Brandt a credible source. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chip_Berlet&diff=prev&oldid=9161554] In August 2005 SlimVirgin and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Rangerdude Rangerdude] discussed the use of "scholarly" material cited to Chip Berlet of Political Research Associates (PRA) on the Roots of Anti-Semitism talk page and had this exchange:

:"PRA is not the kind of organization any of our guidelines is trying to stop us from using, and I'm certain of this because I've been involved in drafting a lot of the information about sources and original research....PRA is a research group and Berlet is a published journalist and author. ...WP:NOR#What_counts_as_a_reputable_publication? says: ''"A magazine or press release self-published by a very extreme political or religious group would often not be regarded as "reputable". For example, Wikipedia would not rely only on an article in a '''Socialist Workers' Party''' magazine to publish a statement about President Bush being gay."'' This clearly doesn't have in mind the type of research group Chip works for. You may find PRA extreme, but it's not a political or religious group, party, or movement.--SlimVirgin 07:12, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Rangerdude only moments before debunked Berlet's scholarly credentials, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Roots_of_anti-Semitism&diff=20212920&oldid=20187928] cited WP:RS on using extreme websites, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Roots_of_anti-Semitism&diff=prev&oldid=20246130] and then rejoined,
:"Curiously your example of the '''Socialist Worker's Party''' does little to help your case as Mr. Berlet's own biography proudly states that he has worked on behalf of this very same extremist group! --Rangerdude 07:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

SlimVirgin then changed Official Wikipedia Reliable Sources Policy to make Berlet appear mainstream and not an extremist. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Rangerdude/Workshop#Request_of_finding_for_ex_post_facto_policy_changes]

Next an old dormant dispute between Brandt and Berlet from a decade and half ago was reignited. The two worked together for many years, but had a falling out in 1991; Brandt was quoted as an anonymous critic from a ''FrontPage magazine.com'' citation in Berlet's wiki entry, with these words,

:“Reviewing one of Berlet’s screeds, one leftist writer mentions Berlet’s “crusade” against Progressives who stray from Berlet's ideological fever swamps by working with non-leftist groups. In a fascinating conclusion, the leftist commentator warns that Berlet “may try to undermine your work and isolate you.” [http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10352]

Berlet expressed displeasure at the criticism and publicly named the "leftist writer";
:This complaint was written by Daniel Brandt, who I criticized because he was urging people on the left to read the anti-Semitic ''Spotlight'' newspaper (at the time published by Holocaust denier Willis Carto.) [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Cberlet/Archive_2005-06_2005-08#Red-baiting_Lie_Article.21]

Berlet wanted the criticism of him and his organization removed. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Political_Research_Associates#Fairness_and_Balance] On the same day the Daniel Brandt biography was created to cast Brandt and his organization as extremist using a guilt by association smear of being aligned with Holocaust denial. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Information_Research#_note-0] Who was the source of the claim? A self published source, Chip Berlet and Political Research Associates. According to the Introduction [http://www.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi/orgs/american/ftp.py?orgs/american//political-research-associates/right.w.left] to the self published source, Berlet's allegation Brandt and his organization were aligned with Holocaust deniers first appeared two months earlier in September of 1991 in an ''extremist'' publication, the Marxist-Leninist ''Guardian''. [http://www.publiceye.org/berlet/berlet_articles.html] The ''Guardian'' newspaper, which at one time had a reporter, Wilfred Burchett, who participated in interrogations of American POWs in North Korean prison-of-war camps, is cited in a contemporaneous book from 1992 by the mainstream publisher ''Prometheus Books'' which is entitled, ''Nazis, Communists, Klansmen, and Others on the Fringe: Political Extremism in America'', by John George, Laird Wilcox, ISBN 1-57392-058-4, as an extremist publication. See Chapter 9, pgs. 125-131. [http://www.questia.com/library/book/nazis-communists-klansmen-and-others-on-the-fringe-political-extremism-in-america-by-john-george-laird-wilcox.jsp]

Added to all these violations of Official Wikipedia Policy is this event, Berlet citing himself and personally inserting potentially libelous and defamatory material from a questionable and self-published source into an article of a living person and fellow registered user. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=55132392&oldid=55131921]

Jimbo Wales echoed SlimVirgin's view that Brandt was not a "credible source", and told ''Editor & Publisher'',
:"I don't regard him as a valid source about anything at all." [http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html]

After possible malicious intent of slander was being publicly discussed surrounding the events which lead to the creation of Brandt's entry, Wales comments to ''Editor & Publisher'' were removed from Brandt's bio under the "tabloid clause" of Reliable Sources. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=prev&oldid=104935334]

Meantime, numerous Wikipedia Administrators have been caught in the crossfire of a drive-by smear against Brandt in an old leftist sectarian dispute none of them know anything about.

==Sinbad Hoax==
On March 16, wikipedia entry on the 50-year old entertainer Sinbad, born David Adkins, states: "He succumbed to a fatal heart attack on the morning of March, 14, 2007." This hoax was widely reported in the media<ref>http://www.ioltechnology.co.za/article_page.php?iSectionId=2891&iArticleId=3734818</ref>.

==Rutgers-Ivy League Hoax==
A Wikipedia entry falsely stated that Rutgers was once invited to join the Ivy League. Although that false statement was eventually removed from Wikipedia, it was not removed before the ''Daily News'' relied on it in this story:

:You don't have to define your college with your football team, but Rutgers long ago decided to give it a try. Back in 1954, when it was considered a 'public Ivy,' Rutgers might have joined the fledgling Ivy League and altered its destiny. But the school declined the offer - arguably the dumbest mistake in its history. Ever since then, Rutgers has scrambled to prove itself worthy of playing football with the big boys."<ref>Bondy, Filip. "They Can Finally Say They Belong Here", New York Daily News, 2006-11-10, p. 92. Retrieved on 2006-12-13.</ref>

==Barbara Bauer Vs. Wikimedia Foundation==
Wikimedia Foundation is one of 17 defendants in a lawsuit suit filed in New Jersey, by Barbara Bauer and her literary agency. Her Wikipedia article was deleted on March 25, 2007 by Wikipedia administrator Doc Glasgow as a "bloody disgrace".<ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauertc.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauertc.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert1.html</ref><ref>http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/bauert2.html</ref>

==Jimmy Wales' Denial that Larry Sanger was a Co-Founder==

The Associated Press and others credit Larry Sanger as the co-founder of Wikipedia.<ref>http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/tech/2007/mar/25/032502465.html
</ref> But the Associate Press quotes Jimmy Wales as denying it:<ref>''id.''</ref>

:"When you write this up please do not uncritically repeat Sanger's absurd claim to be the co-founder of Wikipedia."

:"I know of no one who was there at the company at the beginning who would think it anything other than laughable," he added.

:"I am not bent out of shape about it," he wrote. "The facts are on my side, which is why I bother so little about it."

According to the Associated Press, Jimmy Wales "has repeatedly tried to address this - even going so far as editing his own Wikipedia biography to tone down credit for Sanger. Such autobiographical contributions are frowned upon in Wikipedia's community, and Wales apologized after his changes were noticed and publicized by blogger Rogers Cadenhead in 2005."<ref>''id.''</ref>

==References==
<references />

==External Links==
*[http://www.wikipedia.org Wikipedia]
*[http://www.wikitruth.info/ Wikitruth]
*[http://www.wikipedia-watch.org Wikipedia Watch]
*[http://wikipediareview.com/ Wikipedia Review]

[[Category:Wiki]]

User talk:Dpbsmith

2007-03-13T20:39:27Z

Frijole: Thanks

Comment posted on talk page for Commandments:

Seeing as you seem to be our resident Evolution Expert, I have a question. How Does evolution explain the instinct in bees to only harvest nectar from one kind of plant on any given day? According to the survival of the fittest, the bees should be going to the flowers closest to their hive so as to maximize the amount of nectar that they could gather in a day.
--[[User:CJS|CJS]] 21:43, 15 January 2007 (EST)

:I don't want to be "resident evolution expert" if that means I'm supposed to "prove" evolution, or have a pat answer for everything, or anything like that. And, by the way, I love to argue, but I'm a stranger here and ''trying'' to be a polite guest.

:I don't know a specific answer to your specific question.

:So I'm going to answer your question with another question: how can you be ''sure'' that going to the closest flowers is really the best survival strategy? How can you be sure that what they actually do may not be better?

:Scientists have discovered some surprising things. You might wonder why sickle-cell anemia, a genetic disease, persists in African populations. You'd think that according to Darwinism, the people without sickle-cell anemia would be fitter and that over time the population carrying the sickle-cell gene would be selected out. So, does the continued existence of the sickle-cell gene disprove Darwinism?

:It turns out that the gene that causes sickle-cell anemia only does so when there are two of them... and when there is only one of them, it provides protection against malaria! So, in places where there is malaria, there is selection ''for'' the sickle-cell gene. This benefits the population as a whole, because most members of the population only get one gene, so they get malaria protection without getting sickle-cell anemia. Only the unfortunate people who are homozygous for the gene get sickle-cell anemia.

:So, it may not be at all obvious what is really being selected for... in fact it may take a research study to discover it.

:So, with respect to the bees, the real scientist's question: ''how would you find out?'' What experiments could you perform to find out whether it is better for bees to go to the closest flowers than to go to the flowers they actually go to?

:(Pretty feeble, but the best I can do at short notice!) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 22:24, 15 January 2007 (EST)

:: '''Reply:''' Evolutionists exaggerate the sickle-cell anemia example, though I don't fault Dpbsmith for repeating it. From the Mayo Clinic's website: "Sickle cell anemia is an inherited form of anemia — a condition in which there aren't enough healthy red blood cells to carry oxygen throughout your body. Under normal circumstances, your red blood cells are flexible and round, and they move easily through your blood vessels to carry oxygen to all parts of your body. In people with sickle cell anemia, the red blood cells become rigid and sticky and are shaped like sickles or crescent moons. These irregular-shaped blood cells die prematurely, resulting in a chronic shortage of red blood cells. Plus, they can get stuck when traveling through small blood vessels, which can slow or block blood flow and oxygen to certain parts of the body. This produces pain and can lead to serious complications. There's no cure for most people with sickle cell anemia. However, treatments can relieve pain and prevent further problems." http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sickle-cell-anemia/DS00324

:: So sickle cell anemia is, overall, a harmful disease. And the disease itself does not protect against malaria, but those susceptible to the disease (e.g., have the gene) may be less vulnerable to malaria. I don't know if that's been proven but I have an open mind about it. Regardless, this does not support evolution in any way. There is no evidence that really has been "selection" for those afflicted with vulnerability to sickle cell anemia, and that suggestion seems highly unlikely. The link to evolution here remains a leap of faith. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:24, 16 January 2007 (EST)

:::I happen to think that on the topic of evolution, the scientific community ''has'' allowed itself to become somewhat dogmatic and to claim too much about the explanatory value of the theory.

:::And I also think the "science versus religion" aspect doesn't do much good for either science or religion. The Catholic Church's 1992 rehabilitation of Galileo was a good thing.

:::P. S. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to research whether or not a single allele of the sickle-cell anemia gene really protects against malaria. I think that's sound, but a lot of things that circulate as simple stories turn out to be a lot more complicated when you look into them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:02, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Dpbsmith, I reflected further on your criticism, which was well-taken. Accordingly, I have changed the Commandment #4 in response to your criticism as follows: 4. When referencing dates based on the approximate birth of Jesus, you must give appropriate credit for the basis of the date (B.C. or A.D.). "BCE" and "CE" are not acceptable substitutes because they deny the historical basis for the date.

Thanks for your thoughtful contributions to Conservapedia. --Aschlafly 12:33, 20 December 2006 (EST)

Feel free to respond there. Thanks!

--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:34, 20 December 2006 (EST)

:Much better. Fine, in fact. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:43, 20 December 2006 (EST)

----

I moved our interesting debate about perpetual motion machines to its own talk page for that entry, in the hope it will enlighten and perhaps spark debate by others. I've marked that page as "Watch" now so I will be notified whenever you post to it.

Thanks. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:00, 1 January 2007 (EST)

Your explanation of [[Bell Laboraties]] is superb! I worked there in the mid-1980s and became an expert in UNIX there. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:15, 1 January 2007 (EST)

Nice image of Phillip Brooks! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:08, 6 January 2007 (EST)

*Thanks. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:26, 6 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your entry on <big><math>\pi</math></big>. I improved the symbol using our LaTex capability. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:25, 13 January 2007 (EST)

I am sickened that this discussion on evolution is going on here, not that I agree with your views on it, but there are places to debate this other than a member's talk page. I just wanted to thank you for your conflicting, yet intelligent, contributions. We need more people like you. :) [[User:David R|David R]]

:Well, thanks. But everybody on this talk page has been perfectly courteous. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:42, 17 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your superb improvement to [[geometric progression]]!!! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:35, 19 January 2007 (EST)

:You're welcome. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:41, 19 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for putting your two cents in on the 'spelling issue'. You certainly make more sense than the other person I was speaking to. --[[User:Katja N|Katie]] 21:54, 19 January 2007 (EST)

I'm afraid that you're mistaken about the debates; they are available to anyone who has anything to say.

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 19:33, 20 January 2007 (EST)

Yeah, the debates are for everyone. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 19:39, 20 January 2007 (EST)

*OK, I'll consider that an invitation. Thank you. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:48, 20 January 2007 (EST)

:'''OOPS!'''

You're right, I did mean protected -- not against. Thanks

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 13:57, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your good improvement to my additional example of Wikipedia gossip (about John Tower). Your time reference is insightful. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:09, 26 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your superb improvement to the [[Chappaquiddick]] entry. I didn't realize it is a separate island! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:38, 31 January 2007 (EST)

:Oddly enough, I was just about to add something to it... a quotation from a New York Times editorial. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:52, 31 January 2007 (EST)

*Whoops! I didn't realize I had the font in blue. Thanks for catching that! ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 18:39, 11 February 2007 (EST)

== King James Bible ==
''I have no idea what that last edit is about. Seems completely wrong. What the heck is "REAL Douay-Rheims?" Is it a reliable source? Seems to be pushing some point of view.''
:Please don't revert corrections unless you have at least '''some''' source to back it. The ancient texts were lost at the time of the KJV; it couldn't be based on them. It is well known that the KJV borrowed from the Douay Old Testament. --[[User:Luke-Jr|Luke-Jr]] 11:15, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

== Herman Melville ==
Dpbsmith, thanks for your reply. I don't know what happened to my Melville comments about its shift in popularity. That's OK, the entry looks great the way it is now. Please feel free to add to the content your fascinating material about the NY Times obituaries that you have on the talk page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:01, 3 February 2007 (EST)

== Work in progress ==

Kentish Sir Byng stood for his King, 
Bidding the crop-headed Parliament swing: 
And, pressing a troop unable to stoop 
And see the rogues flourish and honest folk droop, 
Marched them along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song. 

God for King Charles! Pym and such carles 
To the Devil that prompts `em their treasonous parles! 
Cavaliers, up! Lips from the cup, 
Hands from the pasty, nor bite take nor sup 
Till you`re--- 

CHORUS.---Marching along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song. 

Hampden to hell, and his obsequies` knell 
Serve Hazelrig, Fiennes, and young Harry as well! 
England, good cheer! Rupert is near! 
Kentish and loyalists, keep we not here 

CHORUS.---Marching along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song? 

Then, God for King Charles! Pym and his snarls 
To the Devil that pricks on such pestilent carles! 
Hold by the right, you double your might; 
So, onward to Nottingham, fresh for the fight, 

CHORUS.---March we along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song! 

''Kentish:'' the county of Kent was a Royalist stronghold.

''Sir Byng:'' appears to be Browning's invention, not a real person.

''Crop-headed:'' Oliver Cromwell and his followers were Puritans, and many of them wore their hair cut short, an unusual style at the time. See also [[Roundheads]].

''Parliament:'' Before the Civil War, the English Parliament did not play an important role in the government of England. The Civil War pitted Parliament against the King, with Parliament ultimately winning a much more powerful role. Parliament, and its supporters, the Parliamentarians, were the opponents of King Charles.

''swing:'' i.e. Byng thought that the Parliamentarians should be hanged for treason.

''Pym:'' John Pym (1584-1643), leader of the Long Parliament.

''carles:'' variant of "churl," a rude, ill-bred person

''parles:'' Words. Probably also intended to echo "Parliament."

''Lips from the cup:'' Cavaliers are often portrayed as jolly, devil-may-care types who liked their wine, women, and song, as contrasted with the Puritans, who were, well, puritanical.

''Hampden to hell:'' John Hampden, (1595—1643), a champion of Parliament.

Hazelrig:

Fiennes:

Young Harry:

Rupert: Prince Rupert, the German nephew of King Charles, who led a thousand Royalists in a cavalry battle against the Parliamentarians at the Battle of Powick Bridge.

Onward to Nottingham:

===Thanks===

On second thought you're probably right; I unblocked him.

Thanks for the heads up.

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 13:37, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Why do you and JoshuaZ keep refering to "Middle Schoolers"? and what does that have to do with any debate? --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 11:21, 14 February 2007 (EST)

:Hmmm... I thought I had seen that somewhere, but I guess you're telling me it's a mistake. The original article in Wikipedia said "It was created by a World History class of 58 homeschooled teenagers." So I guess I should say "teenager," not "middle-schooler." Sorry.

:It's not directly relevant to any debate, but it certainly affects ''my'' understanding of the site, the project, what's appropriate, and how I should interact with other users. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:28, 14 February 2007 (EST)

::"Teenager" would be accurate. There are not many non-teenage middle-schoolers, though they are certainly welcome also. Also, as time goes by, many of the original teenagers are quickly becoming adults.

::Somewhere else someone (Joshua, I think) speculated that the requirement that entries be clean here was motivated by the age of many users. That's certainly a consideration that sometimes is important. But the bigger reason is to keep the entries on a high level, just as a real encyclopedia would.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:33, 14 February 2007 (EST)

::: I don't know what you mean by a high level in that regard. Britannica has articles on articles on human reproductive systems that I imagine you might consider inappropriate to have articles about and a variety of other, arguably even more "unclean" topics. It isn't clear to me what "cleanliness" has to do with high-mindedness (indeed, I would be tempted argue that if one is sufficiently high-minded everything becomes clean as they are just different parts of God's Creation). [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 12:43, 14 February 2007 (EST)

== Syntax ==

No need to "pretend" thanks for the catching that mistake. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 16:44, 15 February 2007 (EST)

== Appreciation for work on Robert Frost ==

Nice work on improving the Robert Frost entry!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 17 February 2007 (EST)

== Homeschooling ==

Some good edits were caught up and lost in your recent deletions, please be more careful. [[User:Harpie snark|Harpie snark]] 14:50, 23 February 2007 (EST)

== IP or SYSOP? ==

We'd really like to make you a SYSOP, Dpbsmith. With more SYSOPs, we could then reopen new registrations and handle in influx of vandals more easily. You could recommend others to be SYSOP also. You could relinquish SYSOP power at any time, or simply choose not to exercise your powers.

Otherwise, I don't see how to protect your IP from blocking unless you can email it to us at webmaster@conservapedia.com, as just suggested by another SYSOP.

I hope you can become a SYSOP!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 07:54, 24 February 2007 (EST)

:I ''very much'' appreciate the invitation, but I decline... I enjoy writing articles. I enjoy collaborative interaction. I enjoy spirited argument between people willing to play fair, maintain some level of civility, and take the risk of having their opinions changed.

:I don't enjoy fighting vandals and don't want to do the heavy lifting. When the system isn't too slow it's almost as easy to revert an article "manually" as by clicking "rollback" which is 90% of fighting vandalism, anyway.

:(I know you don't believe it, but Wikipedia's stability rests more on the community of editors than the sysops, and Conservapedia's best shot at staying ahead of the vandals is to attract a sufficiency of ordinary editors.)

:Thanks again. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:43, 24 February 2007 (EST)

== [[Real numbers]] ==

I'm fine with your edits (I would argue that decimal representations are always infinite but this may be a nitpick). The main causes of the pain were the previous article insisting that the reals contain "infinite values" and the notion that the real numbers *exclude* anything (since if one wants to talk about them that way, one might as well say they exclude cows and deities). Regarding your other comments, I'm not sure of a general name for the procedure, however the motivation for going to the reals that a mathematician would most likely give is that one wants to be able to take limits. As for infinities, that's complicated and can be dealt with in a variety of different ways depending on what one means by infinity. Wikipedia has a few good articles on these topics. I would recommend [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_arithmetic cardinal arithmetic] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_number ordinal number] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_reals extended reals] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surreal_number surreal numbers] as different examples of ways of incorporating infinity. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 19:26, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Hallo Dpbsmith,

you wrote:

"What was your rationale for this edit? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 10:08, 25 February 2007 (EST)"

Dpb, not many people know this, but every member of the College of Cardinals is automatically a Doctor of Divinity. Other degrees are also possible, though they would normally be granted through one of the several Pontifical Academies. But in every case, cardinals would already have an undergraduate degree that they received in the process of becoming priests. (Although, technically, a non-priest could become a cardinal; however, this has not happened since the Middle Ages, before the College of Cardinals was founded).

[[User:Hiram Whickermeister III]]

Best regards,

Whick

== Earth article unprotection ==

Thank you for your kind request. I composed a lengthy response to you but unfortunately it was lost due to Conservapedia "hiccuping" and me not saving it. I will remove the protection now. Again, thank you for your kind request. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:00, 1 March 2007 (EST)conservative

== pH ==

Yeah, that's why I said "roughly" [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 11:12, 4 March 2007 (EST)

== Your thanks is appreciated regarding my making Conservapedia more factual in regards to the Intelligent Design article ==

Your thanks is appreciated regarding my making Conservapedia more factual in regards to the Intelligent Design article and I wanted to let you know I changed my edit again in order to make it more precise. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:54, 6 March 2007 (EST)conservative

==Articles For Deletion==
When posting for AFD please create an AFD page for the page in question. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 10:16, 7 March 2007 (EST)

== Hey Smithy ==

It has been suggested to me that you are someone who knows what he/she is doing on this site. I am having trouble uploading an image file. Are you able to help? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:03, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:Believe me, I have ''no'' idea what I am doing on this site!

:Image uploading is very flaky. I get error messages about two-thirds of the time. I have no idea why and haven't bothered to ask. What ''seems'' to help is changing the filename, i.e. if it doesn't work try changing the name. But maybe that's just coincidence. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:06, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::Thanks. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:08, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:::No quite sure how to contact the webmaster... I suppose we could try leaving a note at [[User_talk:Conservapedia Webmaster]] but the fact that that page is blank isn't promising... and/or email to webmaster@conservapedia.com . [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:11, 8 March 2007 (EST)

== I trust your judgement regarding the prison delete it ==

I trust your judgement regarding the prison material so delete it. I can't investigate the material right now and block possible parody people because i am researching something for Andy. Let me know if you get into a edit war. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:12, 10 March 2007 (EST)conservative

== I permanently banned the troll Christian Concern ==

I permanently banned the troll "Christian Concern". No need to get Andy involved. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:30, 10 March 2007 (EST)conservative

:While you revel in that block, please block another harmful user - (explicative)Saddam. It would be greatly appreciated. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 22:32, 10 March 2007 (EST)

==the homeschooling thing==
No, I in fact did not read the line you sent me, as I was not aware of it. The word that stuck out as making the whole insulting was "schizophrenic", and that made it sound as though Conservapedia should be treated with contempt.

But after reading your follow-ups, I don't think you intended that at all, so it is me who should be apologizing. And I do. So now, let's get our collective posteriors in gear and make it better than it is. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:44, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

==[[Bible]] article improvements==
Although it needs some filling in regarding the subheadings mentioned in the talk page, that article itself was improved to the point of being original. Check it out. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I've seen too many articles here that suffer from lack of info; it was like someone created an article, threw in a single sentence, pronouced it good, then left. I don't like working like that! There will be additional info and pics added before the week is out to make it look better. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:39, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== a few questions... ==

:a) First, Conservapedia has a policy of original material only, no copying (except short, properly attributed quotations, of course).
::and where may I have found this "policy"? its not on [[The Conservapedia Commandments]] page...

:b) Second, the GFDL license does not allow re-use of GFDL material unless you follow the GFDL rules. Conservapedia itself does not license its material under the GFDL, so re-using it here breaks one of the most important GFDL rules.
::so if conservapedia does not use the GFDL (which I should have realized, my apologies), and there is not a link to the license in use in the lower-left corner like most mediawiki-based sites have, what license is the content of conservapedia under?

{|
| style="background:orange" | [[Image:ccbyncsa.png|right]] This comment was left by [[User:frijole|frijole]]. This, as well as all contributions by this user, is covered by a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike US] license. This has important ramifications for your use or reuse of this material. See the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ license page] for more information.
|} 13:40, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

== Thanks ==

hey, thanks a lot for your replies about my questions. apologies if I came off argumentative at the start, it was uncalled for. You really went above and beyond in your replies, and again, thanks.

~[[User:Frijole|frijole]]

Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T18:01:32Z

Frijole:

''' Joseph Raymond McCarthy''' ([[November 14]], [[1908]] – [[May 2]], [[1957]]) was a [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from the state of [[Wisconsin]] between 1947 and 1957. Beginning in 1950, McCarthy became the most visible public figure to stand up against [[communist]] infiltration of the [[United States]]. He was noted for making unsubstantiated claims that there were large numbers of [[Communist party|Communists]] and [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] spies and sympathizers inside the federal government. Ultimately, his aggressive anticommunist tactics led to his being pilloried by the left in the [[Mainstream media]] and censured by the Democrats in the [[United States Senate]]. The term "[[McCarthyism]]," coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy's practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist pursuits.

Born and raised on a Wisconsin farm, McCarthy earned a law degree at [[Marquette University]] in 1935 and was elected as a [[Circuit (subnational entity)|circuit]] judge in 1939, the youngest in state history.

At age 33, McCarthy bravely volunteered for the [[United States Marine Corps]] and served during [[World War II]]. McCarthy was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross in 1952, but it was later discovered that he had exaggerated the number of missions he had flown in order to be eligible for this award. It was later revealed that he had exaggerated other aspects of his service as well (1,2).

He successfully ran for United States Senate in 1946, defeating [[Robert M. La Follette, Jr.]] After several years in the Senate, McCarthy rose suddenly to national fame in 1950 when he brought to light the fact that "members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring" were employed in the [[United States Department of State|State Department]].

McCarthy made charges of Communist infiltration of the State Department, the administration of [[Harry Truman|President Truman]], [[Voice of America]], and a [[United States Army]] research laboratory. He also revealed the presence of communists, communist sympathizers, and disloyal citizens outside of government as well. With the highly publicized [[Army-McCarthy hearings]] of 1954, McCarthy's support and popularity began to fade due to the efforts of the mainstream media. Later in 1954, a special Senate committee was appointed to study and evaluate McCarthy's methods and actions. Following the recommendations of this committee, the full Senate voted to censure Senator McCarthy by a vote of 65 to 22<ref>Senate Report 104-137 - Resolution For Disciplinary Action. Library of Congress (1995). Retrieved on 2006-10-19.</ref>, making him one of the few senators ever to be disciplined in this fashion.[http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/60.htm] McCarthy died in [[Bethesda Naval Hospital]] on [[May 2]], [[1957]], at the age of 48. The cause of his death was acute [[hepatitis]].[http://www.senatormccarthy.com/index.html]

==VENONA files==
In 1995, when the VENONA transcripts were declassified, further detailed information was revealed about Soviet Union espionage in the United States. VENONA specifically references at least 349 people in the United States—including citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents—who may have cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. It is generally believed that McCarthy had no access to VENONA intelligence, but VENONA supports the view that some of the individuals investigated by McCarthy were indeed Soviet agents. These are several prominent examples:

* [[Mary Jane Keeney]], a [[United Nations]] employee, and her husband Philip Keeney, who worked in the [[Office of Strategic Services]];
* [[Lauchlin Currie]], a special assistant to President Roosevelt;
* [[Virginius Frank Coe]], Director of Division of Monetary Research, U.S. Treasury; Technical Secretary at the [[Bretton Woods]] Conference; [[International Monetary Fund]]
* [[William Ludwig Ullman]], delegate to the United Nations Charter Conference and Bretton Woods Conference;
* [[Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]], Chief Planning Technician, Procurement Division, United States Department of the Treasury and head of the Silvermaster network of spies;
* [[Harold Glasser]], U.S. Treasury Representative to the [[Allied Commission|Allied High Commission in Italy]];
* Four staff members of the [[LaFollette Committee|LaFollette Civil Liberties Committee]], a Senate subcommittee on labor rights chaired by Senator [[Robert La Follette, Jr.]], whom McCarthy defeated for election in 1946;
* [[Allan Rosenberg]], Chief of the Economic Institution Staff, [[Foreign Economic Administration]]; Counsel to the [[National Labor Relations Board]]; argued cases before the [[United States Supreme Court]].

While the underlying premise of Communists in the government was true, many of McCarthy's targets were not complicit in espionage. Recent scholaship has established of 159 persons investigated between 1950 and 1952, there is substantial evidence nine had assisted Soviet espionage using evidence from Venona or other sources. Of the remainder, while not being directly complict in espionage, many were considered security risks.

==References==
#Herman, A. (1999). Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator. Free Press, p 30. ISBN 0-684-83625-4.
#Morgan, T. (Nov./Dec. 2003). Judge Joe: How the youngest judge in Wisconsin's history became the country's most notorious senator. Legal Affairs.
#[http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page62.html Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Lists and Venona]
<references/>

==Copyright Notice==

{| border="1"
| [[Image:Info.png|left]] [[Image:ccbyncsa.png|right]] This article has been edited by [[User:frijole frijole]]. The content he added (as seen [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Joseph_McCarthy&oldid=30137|here]), as well as all contributions by this user, is covered by a '''Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike US''' license. This has important ramifications for your use or reuse of this material. See the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ license page] for more information.
|}

Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T18:00:28Z

Frijole:

''' Joseph Raymond McCarthy''' ([[November 14]], [[1908]] – [[May 2]], [[1957]]) was a [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from the state of [[Wisconsin]] between 1947 and 1957. Beginning in 1950, McCarthy became the most visible public figure to stand up against [[communist]] infiltration of the [[United States]]. He was noted for making unsubstantiated claims that there were large numbers of [[Communist party|Communists]] and [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] spies and sympathizers inside the federal government. Ultimately, his aggressive anticommunist tactics led to his being pilloried by the left in the [[Mainstream media]] and censured by the Democrats in the [[United States Senate]]. The term "[[McCarthyism]]," coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy's practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist pursuits.

Born and raised on a Wisconsin farm, McCarthy earned a law degree at [[Marquette University]] in 1935 and was elected as a [[Circuit (subnational entity)|circuit]] judge in 1939, the youngest in state history.

At age 33, McCarthy bravely volunteered for the [[United States Marine Corps]] and served during [[World War II]]. McCarthy was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross in 1952, but it was later discovered that he had exaggerated the number of missions he had flown in order to be eligible for this award. It was later revealed that he had exaggerated other aspects of his service as well (1,2).

He successfully ran for United States Senate in 1946, defeating [[Robert M. La Follette, Jr.]] After several years in the Senate, McCarthy rose suddenly to national fame in 1950 when he brought to light the fact that "members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring" were employed in the [[United States Department of State|State Department]].

McCarthy made charges of Communist infiltration of the State Department, the administration of [[Harry Truman|President Truman]], [[Voice of America]], and a [[United States Army]] research laboratory. He also revealed the presence of communists, communist sympathizers, and disloyal citizens outside of government as well. With the highly publicized [[Army-McCarthy hearings]] of 1954, McCarthy's support and popularity began to fade due to the efforts of the mainstream media. Later in 1954, a special Senate committee was appointed to study and evaluate McCarthy's methods and actions. Following the recommendations of this committee, the full Senate voted to censure Senator McCarthy by a vote of 65 to 22<ref>Senate Report 104-137 - Resolution For Disciplinary Action. Library of Congress (1995). Retrieved on 2006-10-19.</ref>, making him one of the few senators ever to be disciplined in this fashion.[http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/60.htm] McCarthy died in [[Bethesda Naval Hospital]] on [[May 2]], [[1957]], at the age of 48. The cause of his death was acute [[hepatitis]].[http://www.senatormccarthy.com/index.html]

==VENONA files==
In 1995, when the VENONA transcripts were declassified, further detailed information was revealed about Soviet Union espionage in the United States. VENONA specifically references at least 349 people in the United States—including citizens, immigrants, and permanent residents—who may have cooperated in various ways with Soviet intelligence agencies. It is generally believed that McCarthy had no access to VENONA intelligence, but VENONA supports the view that some of the individuals investigated by McCarthy were indeed Soviet agents. These are several prominent examples:

* [[Mary Jane Keeney]], a [[United Nations]] employee, and her husband Philip Keeney, who worked in the [[Office of Strategic Services]];
* [[Lauchlin Currie]], a special assistant to President Roosevelt;
* [[Virginius Frank Coe]], Director of Division of Monetary Research, U.S. Treasury; Technical Secretary at the [[Bretton Woods]] Conference; [[International Monetary Fund]]
* [[William Ludwig Ullman]], delegate to the United Nations Charter Conference and Bretton Woods Conference;
* [[Nathan Gregory Silvermaster]], Chief Planning Technician, Procurement Division, United States Department of the Treasury and head of the Silvermaster network of spies;
* [[Harold Glasser]], U.S. Treasury Representative to the [[Allied Commission|Allied High Commission in Italy]];
* Four staff members of the [[LaFollette Committee|LaFollette Civil Liberties Committee]], a Senate subcommittee on labor rights chaired by Senator [[Robert La Follette, Jr.]], whom McCarthy defeated for election in 1946;
* [[Allan Rosenberg]], Chief of the Economic Institution Staff, [[Foreign Economic Administration]]; Counsel to the [[National Labor Relations Board]]; argued cases before the [[United States Supreme Court]].

While the underlying premise of Communists in the government was true, many of McCarthy's targets were not complicit in espionage. Recent scholaship has established of 159 persons investigated between 1950 and 1952, there is substantial evidence nine had assisted Soviet espionage using evidence from Venona or other sources. Of the remainder, while not being directly complict in espionage, many were considered security risks.

==References==
#Herman, A. (1999). Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator. Free Press, p 30. ISBN 0-684-83625-4.
#Morgan, T. (Nov./Dec. 2003). Judge Joe: How the youngest judge in Wisconsin's history became the country's most notorious senator. Legal Affairs.
#[http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page62.html Senator Joseph McCarthy’s Lists and Venona]
<references/>

{{User:Frijole/Template:Notice|rev=http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Joseph_McCarthy&oldid=30137}}

Talk:Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T17:40:44Z

Frijole: fixed my signature

This article is horrendously written. Truly. Would someone with some good sources tear it apart?--[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 23:03, 9 March 2007 (EST)

I'd take a look at it now, but I'm going to work soon. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 23:03, 9 March 2007 (EST)

It seems a shame to mention only the horrid propoganda about this true American hero. Maybe we can work out a compromise. [[User:ATB|ATB]] 12:30, 10 March 2007 (EST)

The latest version, although stripped down, is more respectful to this great man. [[User:ATB|ATB]] 14:07, 10 March 2007 (EST)

Although the wikipedia article continues to smear and blacken the name of this great American, I was able to use some of it as a base to flesh out this article to provide some more detail about the great Senator. I hope you like it.
{|
| style="background:orange" | [[Image:ccbyncsa.png|right]] This comment was left by [[User:frijole|frijole]]. This, as well as all contributions by this user, is covered by a [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike US] license. This has important ramifications for your use or reuse of this material. See the [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/ license page] for more information.
|} 13:40, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Well... I hate to go against the grain but the only reason why he's notable is because of the bad things that he did do. And this is the new century, do we really need to keep acting like communism is still the big bad enemy? Last time I checked most communist countries fell out of power, sans China, and democracy still reigns over most of the world. And are the flowery words really needed? Of course it's heroic, what kind of a liberal fool are you to have to be told as such? --[[User:Ronnyreg|Ronnyreg]] 21:52, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

: Go ahead and list the specific bad things that he did. Just don't put meaningless generalities, such as saying that he was "discredited". I put in the actual censure finding against him. Someone else put in how he exaggerated his war record. Do you have anything else to add? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 22:29, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
::Would mentioning that he never came forth with his evidence could as a "generality"? I mean he sure made a lot of accusations and ruined a lot of people without really doing anything but either calling them a communist or having them investigated. --[[User:Ronnyreg|Ronnyreg]] 22:38, 12 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Basically what happened, IMO, as one who has studied this period at length, the FBI & NSA kept Venona evidence a closely guarded secret for several reasons, so they needed evidence ''from other'' sources to go into a court of law. Now, if the FBI led McCarthy to a prime suspect, that would tip the KGB that the US had evidence to suspect such a one. And the Communist conspiracy, which in fact was found to exist based upon several US Government Reports from the 1960s on, was extremely large scale indeed. No fewer than 400 involved, most likely at least 800, and possibly as high as 1200. There were two CPUSA organizations, the "open party", and the "underground apparatus". In my view, the FBI gave McCarthy basically dead-end files.

:::Here an understanding of the relationship between Hoover & McCarthy is necessary. McCarthy was an ex-judge, and Hoover a cop. So the relationship was not unlike any routine law enforcement official going before a judge asking for a search warrant based upon the evidence in hand. But this was not a Court, and McCarthy was willing to use his Legislative Committee to more or less perform an Executive and quasi-Judicial function. The FBI didn't want to tip its hand regarding its real suspects, and the Communist Party membership was quite often an intimate family affair. So the FBI in many instances would hand McCarthy a file of, say, a brother-in-law to the real suspect. Now the person called before Committee may have been a member of the open party, and may have even known his family relative was involved in some questionable things, and the persons' FBI file may have had some dirt or embarrassing thing in it, so they were essentially being blackmailed -- rat out somebody you know, or all this junk in your file becomes public.

:::That's moreless my picture of how it worked. The question remains did McCarthy know he was getting bogus info from the FBI, and I would likewise say he did not. This infact explains the Army-McCarthy hearings, cause Army Signals Intelligence is who handled Venona, and I think at some point McCarthy realized the files from the FBI were dead end, and that info originated somewhere in the Army, so it appeared the Army was hiding something, which indeed they were, the Venona project. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 23:16, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: So how many innocent lives were ruined by McCarthy's false accusations? There are lots of articles that say that McCarthy did harm, but hardly any that specify the harm. If you can specify the harm, then go ahead. Just saying that he ruined people is worthless. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 23:44, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

What do you mean by "ruined?" As far as I know, there is no point by point, alphabetical list of the names of people whose lives were badly affected by McCarthy's irresponsible accusations, but it's certain that careers were needlessly damaged, some of them ended. The people McCarthy injured include Reed Harris ( lost his job), Dr. Julius Hlavaty (long career in the NY public schools ended), and Raymond Kaplan (suicide). I don't know how many people were in Mr. Kaplan's family, but I'm pretty certain he had a wife and children, so their lives were undoubtedly pretty badly affected. And if I take a page from the entry here and credit to McCarthy people the HUAC investigated, the list of damaged lives expands dramatically.
--[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 03:08, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

: I am looking for actual facts, not conclusory propaganda. Reed Harris resigned his government job. He was asked about writing an essay that favored Communists teaching in the schools. Raymond Kaplan was not accused of anything, and had not been called to testify. He was an engineer with knowledge of VOA transmitters not functioning properly, and he might have been called if he had lived. But how is McCarthy to blame? Are you saying that the Senate should not have been investigating the VOA transmitter failure? [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 12:54, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

==Censure==
AmesG has repeatedly removed the actual grounds for censuring McCarthy, leaving the reader the false impression that McCarthy was censured for his anti-communist investigations. In fact he was exonerated McCarthy on all substantive charges. McCarthy was censured for failing to cooperate with the subcommittee that was investigating him, and for insults to the committee that was trying to censure him. If there is some error in my description, then please address it here. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 13:19, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Here is the actual Senate resolution that passed. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 13:25, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:Resolved, That the Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. McCarthy, failed to cooperate with the Subcommittee on Privileges and Elections of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration in clearing up matters referred to that subcommittee which concerned his conduct as a Senator and affected the honor of the Senate and, instead, repeatedly abused the subcommittee and its members who were trying to carry out assigned duties, thereby obstructing the constitutional processes of the Senate, and that this conduct of the Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. McCarthy, is contrary to senatorial traditions and is hereby condemned.

:Sec 2. The Senator from Wisconsin, Mr. McCarthy, in writing to the chairman of the Select Committee to Study Censure Charges (Mr. Watkins) after the Select Committee had issued its report and before the report was presented to the Senate charging three members of the Select Committee with "deliberate deception" and "fraud" for failure to disqualify themselves; in stating to the press on November 4, 1954, that the special Senate session that was to begin November 8, 1954, was a "lynch-party"; in repeatedly describing this special Senate session as a "lynch bee" in a nationwide television and radio show on November 7, 1954; in stating to the public press on November 13, 1954, that the chairman of the Select Committee (Mr. Watkins) was guilty of "the most unusual, most cowardly things I've ever heard of" and stating further: "I expected he would be afraid to answer the questions, but didn't think he'd be stupid enough to make a public statement"; and in characterizing the said committee as the "unwitting handmaiden," "involuntary agent" and "attorneys-in-fact" of the Communist Party and in charging that the said committee in writing its report "imitated Communist methods -- that it distorted, misrepresented, and omitted in its effort to manufacture a plausible rationalization" in support of its recommendations to the Senate, which characterizations and charges were contained in a statement released to the press and inserted in the Congressional Record of November 10, 1954, acted contrary to senatorial ethics and tended to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute, to obstruct the constitutional processes of the Senate, and to impair its dignity; and such conduct is hereby condemned.

== Rschlafly-- Facts ==

What happened to Reed Harris, Dr. Julius Hlavaty, and Raymond Kaplan is not "conclusory propaganda, but fact. Reed Harris was not just questioned, but repeatedly attacked by McCarthy for opinions he'd expressed as a student twenty one years before in a book about the commecialization of college sports, KING FOOTBALL. The book had included a defense of the right of Communists to teach. Do you seriously consider the statement "Communists have the right to teach" so outrageous that it calls for someone to be forced to resign from their job? As for Raymond Kaplan, his rather lengthy and detailed suicide note makes it plain that it was being called to testify before McCarthy's committee that terrified him. ""You see, once the dogs are set on you everything you have done since the beginning of time is suspect," he wrote. "I have never done anything that I consider wrong but I can't take the pressure upon my shoulders any more." Given that Harris had been forced to resign for something he'd written more than two decades before, Kaplan's fear was not unfounded. And the VOA hearings were not just some sort of technical inquiry into why a transmitter malfunctioned. McCarthy's contention was that it was part of a dastardly Communist plot within the VOA, and his investigation included questioning witnesses about their church attendance and religious beliefs and purging VOA overseas libraries of such dangerously "subversive" authors as Dashiell Hammett and Theodore H. White. --PF Fox 13:33, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

User talk:Dpbsmith

2007-03-13T17:40:07Z

Frijole: replaced my sig

File:Ccbyncsa.png

2007-03-13T17:25:58Z

Frijole: an image to add to my signature declaring the licensing of my contributions

an image to add to my signature declaring the licensing of my contributions

Conservapedia:Copyrights

2007-03-13T17:18:08Z

Frijole: clarifications for people seeking additional information on copyrights on CP

'''''A comprehensive and legally binding copyright policy is still under development.'''''

In the meantime, keep these important facts about Copyright in mind when contributing:
*When no other license is stated, copyright defaults to full, "All Rights Reserved" ownership by the content creator. This means that any content you upload to CP remains your own, and noone else has any claim to ownership.
*However, the claim may be made that you are contributing to CP and therefore giving your work, and assigning the copyright, to CP, thus losing any and all control over your contributions. If this is the case, the lack of a formal copyright policy means that there is potential for your work to be used in ways you do not desire.

United States Constitution

2007-03-13T17:04:48Z

Frijole: most people tend to forget about the Articles of Confederation

[[Image:Constitution.jpg|thumb|300px|The United States Constitution]]
The United States Constitution is the supreme legal text that formed the current form [[United States]] government. It superseded the [[Articles of Confederation]]. The Constitution was developed at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia during the summer of 1787 and proposed to the states on September 17, 1787.<ref>http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/constpap.htm</ref> It became law when nine out of thirteen states ratified it. It took effect on March 4, 1789. It is the oldest constitution of its type still in effect.

__NOTOC__
==Full text of the Constitution of the United States==
{| class="toc"
|+<big>'''Main Text'''</big>
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Article._I.|Article I]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._1.|.1]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._2.|.2]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._3.|.3]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._4.|.4]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._5.|.5]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._6.|.6]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._7.|.7]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._8.|.8]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Section._9.|.9]]
| [[#Section._10.|.10]]
|-
| [[#Article._II.|Article II]] || [[#Section._1._2|.1]] || [[#Section._2._2|.2]] || [[#Section._3._2|.3]] || [[#Section._4._2|.4]]
|-
| [[#Article_III.|Article III]] || [[#Section._1._3|.1]] || [[#Section._2._3|.2]] || [[#Section._3._3|.3]]
|-
| [[#Article._IV.|Article IV]] || [[#Section._1._4|.1]] || [[#Section._2._4|.2]] || [[#Section._3._4|.3]] || [[#Section._4._3|.4]]
|-
| [[#Article._V.|Article V]]
|-
| [[#Article._VI.|Article VI]]
|-
| [[#Article._VII.|Article VII]]
|}

{| class="toc"
|+<big>'''[[#Amendments_to_the_Constitution|Amendments]]'''</big>
| [[#Amendment_I|I]] || [[#Amendment_II|II]] || [[#Amendment_III|III]] || [[#Amendment_IV|IV]] || [[#Amendment_V|V]] || [[#Amendment_VI|VI]] || [[#Amendment_VII|VII]] || [[#Amendment_VIII|VIII]] || [[#Amendment_IX|IX]] || [[#Amendment_X|X]]
|-
| [[#Amendment_XI|XI]] || [[#Amendment_XII|XII]] || [[#Amendment_XIII|XIII]] || [[#Amendment_XIV|XIV]] || [[#Amendment_XV|XV]] || [[#Amendment_XVI|XVI]] || [[#Amendment_XVII|XVII]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XVIII|XVIII]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XIX|XIX]]
| [[#Amendment_XX|XX]]
|-
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXI|XXI]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXII|XXII]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXIII|XXIII]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXIV|XXIV]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXV|XXV]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXVI|XXVI]]
|style="padding-right:15px"| [[#Amendment_XXVII|XXVII]]
|}

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

===Article. I.===

====Section. 1.====

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

====Section. 2.====

The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.

Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons. The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct. The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.

When vacancies happen in the Representation from any State, the Executive Authority thereof shall issue Writs of Election to fill such Vacancies.

The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.

====Section. 3.====

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.

Immediately after they shall be assembled in Consequence of the first Election, they shall be divided as equally as may be into three Classes. The Seats of the Senators of the first Class shall be vacated at the Expiration of the second Year, of the second Class at the Expiration of the fourth Year, and of the third Class at the Expiration of the sixth Year, so that one third may be chosen every second Year; and if Vacancies happen by Resignation, or otherwise, during the Recess of the Legislature of any State, the Executive thereof may make temporary Appointments until the next Meeting of the Legislature, which shall then fill such Vacancies.

No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

The Vice President of the United States shall be President of the Senate, but shall have no Vote, unless they be equally divided.

The Senate shall chuse their other Officers, and also a President pro tempore, in the Absence of the Vice President, or when he shall exercise the Office of President of the United States.

The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

====Section. 4.====

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

The Congress shall assemble at least once in every Year, and such Meeting shall be on the first Monday in December, unless they shall by Law appoint a different Day.

====Section. 5.====

Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business; but a smaller Number may adjourn from day to day, and may be authorized to compel the Attendance of absent Members, in such Manner, and under such Penalties as each House may provide.

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.

Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.

Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.

====Section. 6.====

The Senators and Representatives shall receive a Compensation for their Services, to be ascertained by Law, and paid out of the Treasury of the United States. They shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for which he was elected, be appointed to any civil Office under the Authority of the United States, which shall have been created, or the Emoluments whereof shall have been encreased during such time; and no Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.

====Section. 7.====

All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

====Section. 8.====

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow Money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization, and uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States;

To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures;

To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the Securities and current Coin of the United States;

To establish Post Offices and post Roads;

To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries;

To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;

To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water;

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy;

To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;--And

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

====Section. 9.====

The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.

No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

No Tax or Duty shall be laid on Articles exported from any State.

No Preference shall be given by any Regulation of Commerce or Revenue to the Ports of one State over those of another; nor shall Vessels bound to, or from, one State, be obliged to enter, clear, or pay Duties in another.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

====Section. 10.====

No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.

No State shall, without the Consent of the Congress, lay any Imposts or Duties on Imports or Exports, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing it's inspection Laws: and the net Produce of all Duties and Imposts, laid by any State on Imports or Exports, shall be for the Use of the Treasury of the United States; and all such Laws shall be subject to the Revision and Controul of the Congress.

No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.

===Article. II.===

====Section. 1.====

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows:

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

====Section. 2.====

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

====Section. 3.====

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

====Section. 4.====

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

===Article III.===

====Section. 1.====

The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

====Section. 2.====

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-- between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

====Section. 3.====

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

===Article. IV.===

====Section. 1.====

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

====Section. 2.====

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

A Person charged in any State with Treason, Felony, or other Crime, who shall flee from Justice, and be found in another State, shall on Demand of the executive Authority of the State from which he fled, be delivered up, to be removed to the State having Jurisdiction of the Crime.

No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, but shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due.

====Section. 3.====

New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.

====Section. 4.====

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened), against domestic Violence.

===Article. V.===

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

===Article. VI.===

All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

===Article. VII.===

The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same.

The Word, "the," being interlined between the seventh and eighth Lines of the first Page, the Word "Thirty" being partly written on an Erazure in the fifteenth Line of the first Page, The Words "is tried" being interlined between the thirty second and thirty third Lines of the first Page and the Word "the" being interlined between the forty third and forty fourth Lines of the second Page.

Attest William Jackson Secretary

Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto subscribed our Names,

G°. Washington
Presidt and deputy from Virginia

Delaware
Geo: Read
Gunning Bedford jun
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jaco: Broom

Maryland
James McHenry
Dan of St Thos. Jenifer
Danl. Carroll

Virginia
John Blair
James Madison Jr.

North Carolina
Wm. Blount
Richd. Dobbs Spaight
Hu Williamson

South Carolina
J. Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler

Georgia
William Few
Abr Baldwin

New Hampshire
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman

Massachusetts
Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King

Connecticut
Wm. Saml. Johnson
Roger Sherman

New York
Alexander Hamilton

New Jersey
Wil: Livingston
David Brearley
Wm. Paterson
Jona: Dayton

Pennsylvania
B Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robt. Morris
Geo. Clymer
Thos. FitzSimons
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson
Gouv Morris

===Amendments to the Constitution===
These are the amendments that have been added to the Constitution.<ref>http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt</ref> The first ten amendments form the [[Bill of Rights]].

====Amendment I====
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition
the Government for a redress of grievances.

====Amendment II====
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the
right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

====Amendment III====
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the
consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by
law.

====Amendment IV====
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and
no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the
persons or things to be seized.

====Amendment V====
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime,
unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising
in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time
of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense
to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any
criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be
taken for public use, without just compensation.

====Amendment VI====
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and
public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime
shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously
ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory
process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of
Counsel for his defence.

====Amendment VII====
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty
dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a
jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than
according to the rules of the common law.

====Amendment VIII====
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel
and unusual punishments inflicted.

====Amendment IX====
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed
to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

====Amendment X====
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to
the people.

====Amendment XI====
The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any
suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States
by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

====Amendment XII====
The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for
President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant
of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person
voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as
Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as
President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of
votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to
the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of
the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of
Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the
President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors
appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having
the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as
President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot,
the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by
states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this
purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and
a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House
of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice
shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then
the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other
constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the
Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors
appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers
on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the
purpose shall consist of two-thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a
majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person
constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to
that of Vice-President of the United States.

====Amendment XIII====
1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime
whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United
States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

====Amendment XIV====
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State
wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge
the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any
State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to
their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State,
excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the
choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States,
Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or
the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male
inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the
United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion,
or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the
proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole
number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of
President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the
United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a
member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of
any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to
support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in
insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the
enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove
such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law,
including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in
suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the
United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred
in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for
the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and
claims shall be held illegal and void.

5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the
provisions of this article.

====Amendment XV====
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or
previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

====Amendment XVI====
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from
whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and
without regard to any census or enumeration.

====Amendment XVII====
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each
State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall
have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications
requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the
executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such
vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the
executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the
vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of
any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

====Amendment XVIII====
1. After one year from the ratification of this article the manufacture, sale,
or transportation of intoxicating liquors within, the importation thereof into,
or the exportation thereof from the United States and all territory subject to
the jurisdiction thereof for beverage purposes is hereby prohibited.

2. The Congress and the several States shall have concurrent power to enforce
this article by appropriate legislation.

3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of the several States, as
provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the
submission hereof to the States by the Congress.

====Amendment XIX====

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or
abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

====Amendment XX====
1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th
day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d
day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this
article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then
begin.

2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting
shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint
a different day.

3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the
President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become
President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for
the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to
qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President
shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein
neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified,
declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to
act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President
or Vice President shall have qualified.

4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the
persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever
the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the
death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President
whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.

5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the
ratification of this article.

6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the
several States within seven years from the date of its submission.

====Amendment XXI====
1. The eighteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States
is hereby repealed.

2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or possession
of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating liquors, in
violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited.

3. The article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as provided
in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the submission hereof
to the States by the Congress.

====Amendment XXII====
1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice,
and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for
more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President
shall be elected to the office of the President more than once. But this
Article shall not apply to any person holding the office of President, when this
Article was proposed by the Congress, and shall not prevent any person who may
be holding the office of President, or acting as President, during the term
within which this Article becomes operative from holding the office of
President or acting as President during the remainder of such term.

2. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an
amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the
several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States
by the Congress.

====Amendment XXIII====
1. The District constituting the seat of Government of the United States shall
appoint in such manner as the Congress may direct: A number of electors of
President and Vice President equal to the whole number of Senators and
Representatives in Congress to which the District would be entitled if it were
a State, but in no event more than the least populous State; they shall be in
addition to those appointed by the States, but they shall be considered, for
the purposes of the election of President and Vice President, to be electors
appointed by a State; and they shall meet in the District and perform such
duties as provided by the twelfth article of amendment.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

====Amendment XXIV====
1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other
election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or
Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be
denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to
pay any poll tax or other tax.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

====Amendment XXV====
1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or
resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the
President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon
confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate
and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he
is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he
transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties
shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers
of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law
provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of
the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is
unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President
shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting
President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration
that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office
unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of
the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide,
transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the
Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the
President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon
Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that
purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after
receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session,
within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by
two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the
powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge
the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers
and duties of his office.

====Amendment XXVI====
1. The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or
older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any
State on account of age.

2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate
legislation.

====Amendment XXVII====
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and
Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall
have intervened.

==Sources==
<references/>
[[Category: Constitution]]
[[Category:United States law]]

Conservapedia talk:About

2007-03-13T16:58:09Z

Frijole: what kind is that, exactly?

Is that "LIBERAL BIAS" economic or social?

Well, I'm going to assume economic bias, unless I hear otherwise, and change the page accordingly.

==What kind?==

"Conservapedia is rapidly becoming one of the largest and most reliable online educational resources of its kind."

What kind is this, exactly? Is it the kind of source that has an inherent bias and slant towards a point of view? Because in my readings of CP articles, there hardly seems to be an attempt to be factually correct and completely bias-free... – [[User:frijole|Fʀɪɺøʟɛ]] ( [[User_talk:Frijole|тɐʟк]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frijole|¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs]] ) 12:58, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Conservapedia talk:Commandments

2007-03-13T16:56:08Z

Frijole: what license?

==Archives==
[[TCC Archive 1|BC/AD vs BCE/CE]] 
[[TCC Archive 2|American Spellings]] 
[[TCC Archive 3|Cite Sources]]

==Encyclopedic Content==

We should add a new commandment that states that only things that qualify as encyclopedic content will be allowed.
one of our criticisims of Wikipedia is
"Wikipedia claims about 1.5 million articles, but what it does not say is that a large number of those articles have zero educational value. For example, Wikipedia has 995 separate articles about "Moby" and "song". Many hundreds of thousands of Wikipedia articles -- perhaps over half its website -- are about music, Hollywood, and other topics and gossip beneath a regular encyclopedia." We should be backing this up with a commandment. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 22:31, 24 January 2007 (EST)
* Tim, I don't know if that's all that necessary right now. As you say on the South Park page... we have only deleted '''one''' because of its content. Remember, we don't want to have a ton of rules. If this ever becomes a major problem we can add it. [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 08:59, 25 January 2007 (EST)
*Perhaps we should simply make a guideline about encyclopedic content. It could read something like this: "When creating new pages, we request that you attempt to limit your contributions to encyclopedic content." If we add that, we will need to define Encyclopedic Content. I think one of our main problems is that this is rather difficult to define. This whole issue is not very important at the moment, so we can probably just continue what we have been doing so far for the time being. I think we will need a rule on this at some point in the future, however. We should discuss this further so we will be have a plan to use when that time comes. ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 13:11, 25 January 2007 (EST)

We need to add a commandment to ''prevent'' a problem from happening in the future. Is there ever a reason to allow an article that is not encyclopedic content? If not, then why not have a commandment. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 22:48, 25 January 2007 (EST)

If we add an encyclopedic content commandment, it will keep people from posting non-encyclopedic content to begin with. Can anyone give an example of non-encyclopedic content that we would want to keep. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 10:37, 31 January 2007 (EST)

We criticize Wikipedia for havin lots of useless articles that a "real encyclopedia" would not include. If we do not make a rule about such things here, then when we start getting alot of users, we will start having the same problem here. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 15:37, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Tim, I changed my mind. I think it would be smart to make a command about this. [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 15:44, 7 February 2007 (EST)

What is meant by what a real encyclopedia would have? For example, there has been some discussion about whether an article about South Park is acceptable. One could similarly ask about whether the Daily Show would be a legitimate topic for an article(certainly the fact that it was one of the most popular political comedy show on TV and is often accused of having a liberal bias is relevant) or what about comic strips such as Doonsebury and Opus? Similarly, going backwards in time, what about the Twilight Zone which in its original incarnation often included social commentary? Or Gilbert and Sullivan who in there day were considered to be pop culture. Heck, we can continue this all the way back to the Oresteia. If a line is going to be drawn, it should be clear where it is. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 15:46, 7 February 2007 (EST)

I think that we should have a Commandment limiting entries to "[[encyclopedic content]]," and then define encyclopedic content in a seperate page. on the subject of TV shows, we should establish concrete criteria that disqualifies most TV shows but might allow some that have had a particular impact. (I am not sure on [[South Park]] it does not seem to me to be very imortant, but I do not know much about it.) --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 17:09, 7 February 2007 (EST)
: To be honest, its hard for me to see how we couldn't have an article on it given how political the show is and how many people watch it. Also, I think your response about defining it on another page is a bit of a non-answer. Part of my concern above was how to define encyclopedic content and whether there is a good defintion. How possible it is to come to an agreement about how to define encyclopedic content is relevant to whether or not we should have the policy.[[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 17:14, 7 February 2007 (EST)
: I personally know virtually nothing about South Park so I do not really know if we should have it. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 17:28, 7 February 2007 (EST)

===Possible Definitions===
Make suggestions for defining encyclopedic content here.

:The word "encyclopedia" comes from the root "-pedia," learning. "Encyclo-" means... well, here's what the American Heritage dictionary says:
::The word encyclopedia, which to us usually means a large set of books, descends from a phrase that involved coming to grips with the contents of such books. The Greek phrase is ''enkuklios paideia,'' made up of ''enkuklios,'' “cyclical, periodic, ordinary,” and ''paideia,'' “education,” and meaning “general education.” Copyists of Latin manuscripts took this phrase to be a single Greek word, enkuklopaedia, with the same meaning, and this spurious Greek word became the New Latin word encyclopaedia, coming into English with the sense “general course of instruction,” first recorded in 1531. In New Latin the word was chosen as the title of a reference work covering all knowledge.[http://www.bartleby.com/61/97/E0129700.html]

:"Knowledge" has several dictionary meanings, but since the -pedia root means "education," I think the meaning of "knowledge" that applies here is "Learning; erudition: teachers of great knowledge."[http://www.bartleby.com/61/40/K0094000.html]

:So, my definition of "encyclopedic content" would be "content that is clearly related to a school curriculum." In the case of the World Book, I think that's a high school curriculum; the Britannica, a college curriculum.[[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:25, 7 February 2007 (EST)

Here is a general idea for a definition of encyclopedic content: Content that is useful, informative, important, major news, no advertising, no movie or TV show reviews, Etc. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 17:28, 7 February 2007 (EST)

===Unofficial Poll===
Encyclopedic Content Commandment.
===='''For'''====
:1.--[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 17:12, 7 February 2007 (EST)
:2.-- [[User:PhilipB|PhilipB]] 13:15, 14 February 2007 (EST)
:3 [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 01:16, 7 March 2007 (EST) (although maybe as a suggested guideline more than a rule)

===='''Against'''====
:1. Cross that bridge when you come to it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:25, 7 February 2007 (EST)
:2. Clearly not what we want. For example, this would prohibit articles about documentaries. For example, I think most of would see [[Inherit the Wind]], [[The Passion of The Christ]], [[Birth of a Nation]], [[An Inconvenient Truth]], [[Farehenheit 9/11]] as all candidates for articles. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 18:42, 15 February 2007 (EST)
::'''Reply''' I don't see how it would prohibit documentaries or movies. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 19:17, 15 February 2007 (EST)
::: Well then, what precisely are you prohibiting by "no movie or TV show reviews"?[[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 19:57, 15 February 2007 (EST)
::::I mean movie reviews as in: this is a good movie because... or don't see this movie... More Opinionated POV stuff. I guess I could have been more specific. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 22:57, 15 February 2007 (EST)
::::: That doesn't end up saying much. I mean, Wikipedia doesn't allow movie reviews in that sense either. It isn't clear to me now what precisely would be disallowed by this policy that isn't trivial. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 23:00, 15 February 2007 (EST)
:3. Count me as against this proposed limitation. Deletions can always be made later, but at this early stage in the project we want it to be able to grow in many different directions. Recall the parable about the wheat and the chaff? Jesus explained that you do not sort the two early, but only at harvest. No reason to rush to delete and risk stamping out something that might grow and bear fruit.
:I might add that the [[Bias in Wikipedia]] page does not complain about useless Wikipedia entries. One (of 22) complaints there criticized Wikipedia's bragging about have so many entries, which the vast majority of its entries are frivilous. That is a complaint about misleading advertising, not a demand for deletion. Several complaints about Wikipedia on [[Bias in Wikipedia]] are about speedy and arbitrary deletions, something we want to avoid here.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:45, 15 February 2007 (EST)
:'''Reply''' The Examples of Bias page has 5 entries attacking Wikipedia for having too much useless Info, (Nos 7, 10, 18, 19 and 22) and only 1 attacking the deletion policy, (No 9) --TimSvendsen 11:59, 15 February 2007 (EST)

==="Inclusionism" versus "deletionism"===
This discussion, and the one at [[AFD Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious]], parallel a very longstanding polarization in Wikipedia between "inclusionism" and "deletionism." When people are allowed to edit without direct supervision, they concentrate on those topics for which they have the greatest enthusiasm, which leads to unbalanced coverage. It also leads to the creation of articles which detractors call "cruft:" articles covering extreme minutiae, or articles covering things of interest to only a tiny number of people.

Aschlafly criticizes the overemphasis on pop culture, but I don't know if he's even run across the cruftier kinds of Wikipedia articles. Some specific topic areas that have generated heated discussion in the past:
*Unimportant roads, e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netcong_Circle Netcong Circle], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Route_520_%28New_Jersey%29 County Road 520, New Jersey]
*Minuscule micronations, e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kugelmugel Republic of Kugelmugel] (small organizations which claim to be independent nations.) (A ''well''-known one would be Sealand).
*Conlangs (artificially constructed languages) used by tiny numbers of people, e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toki_Pona Toki Pona] (''Well''-known ones would be Esperanto... and Klingon).
*Overspecialized lists, e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_songs_containing_the_name_of_a_ship,_aircraft_or_spacecraft List of songs containing the name of a ship, aircraft or spacecraft]
*Schools with nothing obviously special or important about them, e.g. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battlefield_Middle_School Battlefield Middle School]
People are constantly contributing articles about games, phrases, etc. said to be in use at a single school, to the point where Wikipedia actually has a guideline, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_for_things_made_up_in_school_one_day Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day].

(No doubt Aschlafly, who keeps giving me rope on which I keep hanging myself, will add these to his examples of Wikipedian silliness...)
Inclusionists concentrate on the importance of building the encyclopedia and attracting contributions, and emphasize the virtues of improving rather than deleting sketchy articles on "silly" subjects. Some inclusionists would accept articles on any topic whatsoever, subject only to "verifiability." Deletionists emphasize the importance of keeping a high standard and getting rid of low-quality articles that are not actually being improved. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:16, 16 February 2007 (EST)

A different problem, which Conservapedia may encounter in time, is self-promotion. As Wikipedia began to attract wide notice, it occurred to many people that an article in Wikipedia could be an inexpensive form of publicity. This has led to fairly formalized "notability" criteria for websites, corporations, and rock bands. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:13, 16 February 2007 (EST)

In the end, however, we have to remember that online encyclopedias are infinitely expandable, to the point of encompassing all human knowledge in time. The fact that the Britannica leaves some things out may be more a case of "Nobody will buy a 3,000 volume set" than a case of "Some things shouldn't be in an encyclopedia". The emphasis on minutiae may be Wikipedia's greatest draw - you don't go to an online encyclopedia to find things you can find at the library, you go on to find the things you cannot find anywhere else. In another ten years, when Wikipedia fills in the gaps, it may very well be THE place to go when looking something up, just because you can find ANYTHING there, no matter how obscure. Reputation counts.--[[User:Smalltownhick|Smalltownhick]] 20:15, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

==WWII German Entries==
We all know i have done alot of WWII entries in German. I hope i am not breaking rule #5. Get back to me on that. [[User:Will N.]]

== American English spelling and foreign names. ==

Should Martín Torrijos or Martin Torrijos be preffered? [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 21:00, 15 February 2007 (EST)

*We seem to be using American spellings, as in the case of [[Hapsburg]] (instead of Habsburg), so I guess we should omit the accent mark. ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 21:07, 15 February 2007 (EST)

The accent is part of the guy's ''name''. American spellings accept the accent mark within names. --[[User:David R|David R]] 12:47, 16 February 2007 (EST)

Also, I should note that the American spelling of the Austrian dynasty (Ha'''p'''sburg in America) seems like a strange case to cite in arguing against Wikipedia's supposed Anglophilia, and as a policy precedent for Conservapedia. The actual name of the dynasty is Ha'''b'''sburg. As such, most scholars (including Americans) prefer the original spelling, and I see no reason not to use this, particularly since isn't a question of transliteration or preserving a diacritical mark not used in English.

To me, this screams for a clarification. Even if Conservapedia wants its content to use American spellings, does this extend to "Americanizing" proper names and official names/titles? Would Conservapedia have the name of the ruling party in the British parliament spelled "Labor," even though its official name is "Labour"? Or, to give another example, would Slavic names like "Edvard" and "Josef" be rendered into their English equivalents "Edward" and "Joseph"? Personally, I think the rule about American spelling should not be absolute, and that formal names of individuals and organizations should be retained as much as possible, including appropriate accents and diacritical marks. I'm not saying the original names or acronyms of foreign organizations (as opposed to personal names) would have to be used exclusively, but that it would be good to include the original name in the entry as a point of reference.

For instance, an entry on the German Nazi Party could give its original German name and acronym in parentheses (Nationalsozialistiche Deutsche Arbeitspartei, or NSDAP), along with an English translation (National Socialist German Workers Party). It's useful for someone who's studying a foreign language and wants to know the name in the original, and also as a means of explaining why the acronyms often used for such organizations don't always correspond exactly to the English translation.

== "Metric" vs. "English" units in scientific articles? ==
While changing [[Earth]] from a prank entry to a real entry, I realized I don't know what the Conservapedian community prefers with respect to style. For over a century, scientific writing has always used "metric" units exclusively, while in commerce and everyday life the United States uses the "English" system (pounds, inches, feet, miles, gallons, etc.)

For a while, in the seventies, it appeared that the U. S. might start using the metric system in ordinary life, but the Reagan administration put the kibosh on that. The imposition of the metric system into ordinary life is vaguely seen as "liberal" and opposition to it as "conservative." (BTW one of the horrors of George Orwell's "Nineteen Eighty-Four" was that his nightmare totalitarian state had imposed the metric system on England and pubs wouldn't draw "pints" any more).

(Formally and properly the "metric" system is called SI for "système international") The system used in the United States is sometimes called "English" but is properly called "U. S. Customary" because some of the units are different; gallons, for example).

The metric system has been legal in the United States (though of course not mandatory) since 1866, and all U. S. measurements have for a very long time been legally defined with reference to the metric system, i.e. the legal definition of one inch is 25.4 mm.

What style is preferred in Conservapedia for clearly scientific material?

1) '''Doesn't matter.''' Use whatever is convenient, i.e. whatever was used in whatever source was consulted for writing the material; for scientific material that would usually be SI. As a service to the reader, add a conversion later ''at any convenient time'' and without any fussing or making a political issue of it.

2) '''English (metric).''' Use U. S. Customary, with metric equivalent in parentheses: "The average distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 93 million miles (150 million km)?"

3) '''Metric (English).''' Use SI, with U. S. Customary equivalent in parentheses: "The average distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 150 million kilometers (93 million mi)."

4) '''English only.''' Use U. S. Customary only: "The average distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 93 million miles.?"

5) '''Metric only.''' "The average distance from the Earth to the Sun is about 150 million miles."

Choice 1 is my preference.

P. S. Google will convert units for you. If you "search" for "50 cc in fluid ounces" Google returns "50 cc = 1.69070113 US fluid ounces" [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 05:43, 1 March 2007 (EST)

I don think that we can ask our contributors to bother converting their information to our prefered system.

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 09:14, 1 March 2007 (EST)
==External Links, Bots==
I propose the following. ''External links should be to reputable sites that are connected to the article subject.'' and ''Unauthorized bots are prohibited.''

Thoughts? [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 20:51, 6 March 2007 (EST)

:Do you have any firm criteria in mind for defining 'reputable?' [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 20:54, 6 March 2007 (EST)

:: And what do you mean by connected? In fact, I would think in many cases a certain level of lack of connection is a good thing since there is likely to be less bias. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 20:58, 6 March 2007 (EST)

:Reputable will probably have to be done on a case by case basis and I mean connected as in not placing a link for cooking in the physics sections. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 21:04, 6 March 2007 (EST)

:: I don't think we need a policy to tell people that completely unrelated links shouldn't be put in (I'd also phrase that differently anyways something like "External links should be relevant to the subject of the article at hand". I am very worried about cases by case reputability deciding. While obviosly at the end of the day every case is slightly different, we will need general rules. (So for example, it seems that some users have already asserted that the Talk Origins Archive is so bad that we can't even link to it, while CreationWiki can even be used as a source). [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 21:11, 6 March 2007 (EST)
:::I created a list to compile possible rules.[[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 21:43, 6 March 2007 (EST)
:Anyone opposed to bot restrictions? [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 21:43, 6 March 2007 (EST)
==Brainstorm List-Reputability Guidelines==
*The site generally should not exist primarily for profit
*Sites should have factual content

== Regarding repeatedly changing words to the "Brit" spelling ==

I think Conservapedia should merely '''slightly favor''' American spelling of words since most users would probably be American. Specifically, I think that only titles of articles should favor the American spelling and we should have redirects using the British spellings. I think that people from Britain and the commonwealth (who probably use British spellings) can make valuable contributions to Conservapedia. I see no reason to alienate these individuals by majoring on the minors. I see no problem with using British spellings and for Brits and others to change the various words spelling to British spellings since they likely believe the "American spelling" is incorrectly spelled. I see no reason to ban someone for repeatedly changing the spelling of words to the British spelling since they might in many cases not even know there was an American spelling to various words. In short, I see no reason why Conservapedia should be associated with being a "Ugly American" organization. I think such a policy outlined here would insure that Conservapedia has more of a global impact. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:59, 6 March 2007 (EST)conservative

:I see your point, but we are an American organization, and the Commandment does not completely prohibit British spelling. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 23:02, 6 March 2007 (EST)

Actually it says that the user will be block after repeated uses of the British spelling. But I do not see much dissent coming from our motherland. A British magazine did an article on Conservapedia, in which they gave our description and a short paragraph. It was lacking in criticism of our rule. So I don't think it is as offensive as you make it out to be Conservative. However, I do not object to making redirect pages that convert from the British spelling. That seems like a very acceptable idea. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 23:09, 6 March 2007 (EST)
:::I just wanted to add that I am an American and was born in America. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:06, 7 March 2007 (EST)conservative

::::Haha. I did not mean to convey that I thought you British. I am sure you are a great American. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 00:10, 7 March 2007 (EST)
==Bots==
I proposed a Commandment above prohibiting unauthorized bots. Anyone opposed to implementation? [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:13, 7 March 2007 (EST)

What exactly is a bot?

:a bot, as defined in Commandment 7, is a piece of software that can make over a hundred edits per second. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 00:56, 9 March 2007 (EST)

==What counts as "gossip"==

I don't think its just discussion about people persay, but you mentioned in general its a desire to avoid entries that seem like a "national enquirer" thing. So where do entries like [[facebook]] and [[myspace]] come in? Does this stuff count as worthwhile subject matter or is it "gossipy"? [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 00:14, 8 March 2007 (EST)

In my opinion, MySpace could be argued to be a legitimate entry because it's frequently in the news relating to the issues of Internet privacy and safety. However, I saw that entry and the Facebook one and had the same concerns that you did. That being said, Mr. Schlafly said somewhere else that there's nothing wrong with having a few "fun" entries, so I don't think that it's a big deal. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 01:46, 8 March 2007 (EST)

==Obscenity==

Since Conservapedia admins are deleting articles that they consider obscene the Conservapedia Commandments should probably mention this and their definition of obscenity. On a related note family friendliness should also be defined . [[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 00:18, 8 March 2007 (EST)
:Family friendly and obscenity are pretty much "Would you show this to your child?" [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:12, 8 March 2007 (EST)
:: What people are willing to show their children varies from family to family and on the age of the child. Iin my family the level of profanity allowed depended on context of its use- profanity directed at someone else was much more problematic than profanity used as interjections or adverbs. ( can think of at least one English word that has two forms and depending where you are one is more acceptable than the other. I would also ask if the word for a female dog is acceptable? Does it depend on what context one is using it in? What about the word for an illegimate offspring? Two examples which I can probably safely mention are "gosh" which is no longer considered a serious swear by almost anyone and the word "sex." All of these seem to depend on both age and individual family. A much clearer criterion is needed. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 03:14, 8 March 2007 (EST)
:: I agree that this is too subjective. An example that I think is appropriate for Conservapedia is the Bible. Nobody will deny that there are passages in the Bible that many parents may be uncomfortable with their children reading. (I remember when I was a child asking my mother to explain the scene in Genesis where Lot impregnates his daughters and not receiving an answer.) Likewise, on Conservapedia, there may need to exist some pertinent, encylopedic information which may fall within the "gray area" of "would you show your children this?" Common sense in these cases may need to prevail. I'm not saying that we need to have graphic articles about sexuality or anything of the like. I'm just saying that there may need to be exceptions to the rule that Geo.plrd mentioned. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 01:44, 9 March 2007 (EST)
:i said pretty much, it isn't hard and fast. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:47, 9 March 2007 (EST)

==Sock & Meat Puppets==
Opinions? [[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 00:42, 9 March 2007 (EST)
:Due to the restrictive nature of account creation and anon blocking, I don't believe we have any. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 00:45, 9 March 2007 (EST)
::No probably not but it might be a good idea to get something in the commandments before trouble starts.
:::I rather think we ''have'' had some, but it's all guesswork, of course. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:29, 9 March 2007 (EST)
:How about, ''Using sockpuppets to evade blocks is prohibited'' [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:35, 9 March 2007 (EST)

::Do we care? Simpler just to ban accounts which break the rules and leave it at that. If a blocked user comes back as a sock, but stays entirely within the rules, does it really matter? The block achieved its aim, surely.

::Using sockpuppets to support one's arguments or edits is a different matter altogether, of course. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 08:32, 9 March 2007 (EST)

::''Use of sockpuppets to influence discussion or proceedings is prohibited.'' work? [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 21:15, 9 March 2007 (EST)

:::Considering that discussions are not polls, I don't see why this matters. I also don't really see it on Wikipedia, even though things move on a scale where this ''might'' matter in a way. The current rules pretty much cover things. If you have to add a rule, just add something like "Don't act like a total jerk." and be done with it. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 08:37, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

== suggestion as far as addition to the commandments - Encyclopedic/Non combative tone ==

I have a suggestion as far an addition to the commandments. How about a commandment that "Thou shall not have an unencyclopedic tone in thy writing." I think this would help better manage the amount of material that is argumentative in tone and obvious actions of trolls. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 20:24, 9 March 2007 (EST)conservative

:While I like the idea, enforcing it would be tough. Our own idea of ''tone'' would be the basis for this commandment and I don't think everyone's idea of ''tone'' coincides. And I think favorable tone exists in some pages. It would be a hard commandment to implement. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 20:29, 9 March 2007 (EST)

: I highly agree with David on this one. We do need an encyclopedic content commandment though... [[User:Conservapedia Webmaster|Conservapedia Webmaster]] 20:41, 9 March 2007 (EST)

::One relevant suggestion on (whispers) Wikipedia is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_instruction_creep Avoid instruction creep.] The whole essay is actually well worth reading, but the gist is: "'''Instruction creep''' occurs when a person or persons add to a list of instructions repeatedly, causing it to increase in size and complexity over time... Procedures are popular to suggest but unpopular to follow, due to the effort required to locate, read, learn and abide by them... New policies and guidelines should be added only where they will actually be helpful."

::So the question here is, will adding "Encyclopedic/Non combative tone" to the list of commandments actually be helpful? Is it actually likely to have an effect on what people do? Are these rhetorical questions? (Yes). In my opinion, people are most likely to be influenced by the behavior of the other editors the meet here; next most likely to be influenced by the tone of other pages they read here; and least likely to be influenced by what is on the "commandments" list. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:47, 9 March 2007 (EST)

:: There is value in keeping the list of Commandments short and simple. God only issued 10 Commandments for all of life. Let's try to make do with less for Conservapedia.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:50, 9 March 2007 (EST)
::: Oh really? I see a lot more commandments than just 10 in the text. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 21:02, 9 March 2007 (EST)
::::If you are referring to Exodus' 10 Commandments in the Bible, then you are terribly mistaken - they are called the 10 commandments for a reason. But I see where you might find more than 10 - Leviticus contains "''mini''-commandments" that direct the Jews how to do almost everything pertaining to their lives. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 21:10, 9 March 2007 (EST)
::::: Oh? Deuteronomy contains a large number as well, as does Exodus, and nowhere in the text are those 10 particularly emphasized. Indeed, the 10 commandments when they are given are given with a whole host of other rules as well. And it is very hard to call the others "mini-commandments" considering that many of them are death penalty crimes. I don't know about you, but I don't think of anything I can get the death penalty for as a small commandment. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 21:24, 9 March 2007 (EST)
:::::"A soft tongue breaketh the bone" [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:14, 9 March 2007 (EST)
::::::Good quote and very true. Unfortunately I do not know what it has to do with my previous post. If you are talking about tone, then yes, a ''softer'' tone can persuade much more efficiently than a harsh one, which is why I oppose most of the more overtly biased articles. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 21:20, 9 March 2007 (EST)
:::::::Yes, I agree with this. A partisan tone needs to be avoided; this can be done with well research and logically grounded sound presentations. Not hostile or angry. [http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2007-March/064694.html Wikien-1] has a running thread on how its going over here. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:39, 9 March 2007 (EST)

::Tone can be ironed out in the collaborative effort; good sourcing is the main ingredient. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 21:01, 9 March 2007 (EST)

==Bible==

How about a commandment stating that Bible and research based on the Bible is considered valid. Initially I saw no reason for such a commandment but as Conservapedia users have expanded in number there are increasing numbers of edit removing biblical references from articles.--[[User:AustinM|AustinM]] 06:51, 10 March 2007 (EST)

*What are some examples of biblical references being removed? (Go into the History of the article, click on "Diff" at the point where it was removed, copy the long URL, and paste here...) Were they truly relevant? What did the whomever removed them state as the reason? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 07:12, 10 March 2007 (EST)

::The reasons for such removal are simple: there are individuals here who have brought their liberal-leaning bias with them from Wikipedia, and the intent is sabotage. Don't believe me? Go to Wikipedia here:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JoshuaZ], and you'll see a subheading titled '''Conservapedia contributions''', and you'll see the following:
:::''Josh, I've got 108 people in my facebook group "Conservapedia is the Funniest Shit I've Ever Read" all contributing [tastefully] to conservapedia. We're not being blatantly vicious, but rather presenting them with cited facts. Their site is a frickin' joke. As we all know, to quote the esteemed Stephen Colbert, "reality has a well-known liberal bias." Thanks for fighting the good fight over there with us. --Boss hogg01 05:45, 9 March 2007 (UTC)''
::The individual referred to as "Josh" is [[user:JoshuaZ]], who has nested himself here. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:45, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

==Plagiarism/Copying from Wikipedia==

I propose another commandment, even though it should be common sense, that you can't copy from other sites. I've come across too many articles that have been copied directly from Wikipedia, and maybe fewer people would do it if there was a Commandment about it. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 00:59, 11 March 2007 (EST)

:Copying/making derived works from wikipedia is allowed under the terms of the [[GFDL]]. Instead of banning content from wikipedia, editors should be encouraged to maintain the license of GFDL content under the terms of the GFDL. [[User:MikeA|MikeA]] 03:13, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

::Most wikis are under the GFDL so they can freely borrow from each other and I can't think of a good reason why Conservapedia should be any different in that regard. [[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 03:17, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

::::I suspect that Aschlafly wants to maintain more control, or at least have the option of maintaining more control, than the GFDL allows. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 11:13, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Well, direct copy-pasting should be discouraged, as it is sort of hypocritical; "we don't like Wikipedia, that's why we created this project, but lots of the information here is an exact duplicate" doesn't make all that much sense. Editors should be encouraged, however, to use Wikipedia articles as jumping-off points for articles, and to glean ideas for what to add to an article lacking in content. Just my $0.02. --[[User:Hojimachong|Hojimachong]] 03:18, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

::::For what it's worth, ''Wikipedia'' is perfectly cool with the idea of a "Wikipedia fork," that is ''starting'' with Wikipedia and ''changing'' it ("creating a derivative work")... e.g. removing content that's inappropriate for children, correcting bias selectively in articles that seem biassed, or whatever. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 11:13, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm with Hojimachong. I do use Wikipedia for ideas when writing articles from scratch, but I try to write everything myself. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 03:19, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

: A lot of .gov sites don't carry copyrights and I think are de facto PD. Caveat: IANAL [[User:Cracker|Second Amendment]] 03:21, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:the copyright policy should take care of that. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 03:42, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

What about things such as medications or treatment? I tried looking up medications, can't find them here. Yet I can find them on wikipedia very easily. Furthermore what about medical conditions?

The copyright policy is clear concerning Wikipedia articles: there is none, and everything is in the public domain. If it is forbidden to use such articles as a basis for our own here, then it must be perfectly clear on that point. But in my own opinion, I am for using such articles, improving them, removing bias and anti-Christian/conservative stuff. What say you? [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 23:33, 11 March 2007 (EDT)
:a copyright policy proposal is located at [[User:Geo.plrd/copyr2]] [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 23:51, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

:Karajou, Wikipedia HAS a copyright policy. It's most definitely not public domain. And since Conservapedia most likely won't use the GFDL for its own content, we can't just grab articles and repost them here as our own. At least that's what I understood. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 16:34, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

At the very least, I'd like some clarification. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 15:17, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

Nowhere on the site can I find any reference to the license applied to Conservapedia content. What is it? It is both unreasonable and impractical to expect this wiki to grow without providing this information to the potential contributors. Are we to assume that all the content that we submit becomes sole property of Conservapedia under traditional copyright? This is a problem of grave importance that ''must'' be addressed before Conservapedia can expect to grow beyond its meager roots. – [[User:frijole|Fʀɪɺøʟɛ]] ( [[User_talk:Frijole|тɐʟк]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frijole|¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs]] ) 12:56, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

==Categorizing Articles==
On someone's talk page an admin said :

Hi and welcome. Please don't add a tag to a bunch of entries. Please improve them instead. Blocking will occur of accounts that simply tag entries.

If this is true than the Conservapedia Commandments should mention it. Unwritten rules are always frustrating to new editors.

[[User:Sulgran|Sulgran]] 00:55, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

==Links in an article==

My question is in regard to how closely an article should be substantiated, or attributed. For example, the [[Scientology]] article has no links within it. Some of its statements are true (of my own knowledge). Other statements in it are opposed by the Church of Scientology (several court cases). Should the article be kept brief and simply have no critics' 'lies' in it, or should the article attribute its statements ? Or is there another, better way? [[User:Terryeo|Terryeo]] 21:04, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

User talk:Dpbsmith

2007-03-13T16:54:07Z

Frijole: a few questions...

Comment posted on talk page for Commandments:

Seeing as you seem to be our resident Evolution Expert, I have a question. How Does evolution explain the instinct in bees to only harvest nectar from one kind of plant on any given day? According to the survival of the fittest, the bees should be going to the flowers closest to their hive so as to maximize the amount of nectar that they could gather in a day.
--[[User:CJS|CJS]] 21:43, 15 January 2007 (EST)

:I don't want to be "resident evolution expert" if that means I'm supposed to "prove" evolution, or have a pat answer for everything, or anything like that. And, by the way, I love to argue, but I'm a stranger here and ''trying'' to be a polite guest.

:I don't know a specific answer to your specific question.

:So I'm going to answer your question with another question: how can you be ''sure'' that going to the closest flowers is really the best survival strategy? How can you be sure that what they actually do may not be better?

:Scientists have discovered some surprising things. You might wonder why sickle-cell anemia, a genetic disease, persists in African populations. You'd think that according to Darwinism, the people without sickle-cell anemia would be fitter and that over time the population carrying the sickle-cell gene would be selected out. So, does the continued existence of the sickle-cell gene disprove Darwinism?

:It turns out that the gene that causes sickle-cell anemia only does so when there are two of them... and when there is only one of them, it provides protection against malaria! So, in places where there is malaria, there is selection ''for'' the sickle-cell gene. This benefits the population as a whole, because most members of the population only get one gene, so they get malaria protection without getting sickle-cell anemia. Only the unfortunate people who are homozygous for the gene get sickle-cell anemia.

:So, it may not be at all obvious what is really being selected for... in fact it may take a research study to discover it.

:So, with respect to the bees, the real scientist's question: ''how would you find out?'' What experiments could you perform to find out whether it is better for bees to go to the closest flowers than to go to the flowers they actually go to?

:(Pretty feeble, but the best I can do at short notice!) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 22:24, 15 January 2007 (EST)

:: '''Reply:''' Evolutionists exaggerate the sickle-cell anemia example, though I don't fault Dpbsmith for repeating it. From the Mayo Clinic's website: "Sickle cell anemia is an inherited form of anemia — a condition in which there aren't enough healthy red blood cells to carry oxygen throughout your body. Under normal circumstances, your red blood cells are flexible and round, and they move easily through your blood vessels to carry oxygen to all parts of your body. In people with sickle cell anemia, the red blood cells become rigid and sticky and are shaped like sickles or crescent moons. These irregular-shaped blood cells die prematurely, resulting in a chronic shortage of red blood cells. Plus, they can get stuck when traveling through small blood vessels, which can slow or block blood flow and oxygen to certain parts of the body. This produces pain and can lead to serious complications. There's no cure for most people with sickle cell anemia. However, treatments can relieve pain and prevent further problems." http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/sickle-cell-anemia/DS00324

:: So sickle cell anemia is, overall, a harmful disease. And the disease itself does not protect against malaria, but those susceptible to the disease (e.g., have the gene) may be less vulnerable to malaria. I don't know if that's been proven but I have an open mind about it. Regardless, this does not support evolution in any way. There is no evidence that really has been "selection" for those afflicted with vulnerability to sickle cell anemia, and that suggestion seems highly unlikely. The link to evolution here remains a leap of faith. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 01:24, 16 January 2007 (EST)

:::I happen to think that on the topic of evolution, the scientific community ''has'' allowed itself to become somewhat dogmatic and to claim too much about the explanatory value of the theory.

:::And I also think the "science versus religion" aspect doesn't do much good for either science or religion. The Catholic Church's 1992 rehabilitation of Galileo was a good thing.

:::P. S. I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader to research whether or not a single allele of the sickle-cell anemia gene really protects against malaria. I think that's sound, but a lot of things that circulate as simple stories turn out to be a lot more complicated when you look into them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 09:02, 16 January 2007 (EST)

Dpbsmith, I reflected further on your criticism, which was well-taken. Accordingly, I have changed the Commandment #4 in response to your criticism as follows: 4. When referencing dates based on the approximate birth of Jesus, you must give appropriate credit for the basis of the date (B.C. or A.D.). "BCE" and "CE" are not acceptable substitutes because they deny the historical basis for the date.

Thanks for your thoughtful contributions to Conservapedia. --Aschlafly 12:33, 20 December 2006 (EST)

Feel free to respond there. Thanks!

--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:34, 20 December 2006 (EST)

:Much better. Fine, in fact. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:43, 20 December 2006 (EST)

----

I moved our interesting debate about perpetual motion machines to its own talk page for that entry, in the hope it will enlighten and perhaps spark debate by others. I've marked that page as "Watch" now so I will be notified whenever you post to it.

Thanks. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:00, 1 January 2007 (EST)

Your explanation of [[Bell Laboraties]] is superb! I worked there in the mid-1980s and became an expert in UNIX there. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:15, 1 January 2007 (EST)

Nice image of Phillip Brooks! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:08, 6 January 2007 (EST)

*Thanks. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:26, 6 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your entry on <big><math>\pi</math></big>. I improved the symbol using our LaTex capability. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:25, 13 January 2007 (EST)

I am sickened that this discussion on evolution is going on here, not that I agree with your views on it, but there are places to debate this other than a member's talk page. I just wanted to thank you for your conflicting, yet intelligent, contributions. We need more people like you. :) [[User:David R|David R]]

:Well, thanks. But everybody on this talk page has been perfectly courteous. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:42, 17 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your superb improvement to [[geometric progression]]!!! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:35, 19 January 2007 (EST)

:You're welcome. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:41, 19 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for putting your two cents in on the 'spelling issue'. You certainly make more sense than the other person I was speaking to. --[[User:Katja N|Katie]] 21:54, 19 January 2007 (EST)

I'm afraid that you're mistaken about the debates; they are available to anyone who has anything to say.

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 19:33, 20 January 2007 (EST)

Yeah, the debates are for everyone. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 19:39, 20 January 2007 (EST)

*OK, I'll consider that an invitation. Thank you. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:48, 20 January 2007 (EST)

:'''OOPS!'''

You're right, I did mean protected -- not against. Thanks

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 13:57, 25 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your good improvement to my additional example of Wikipedia gossip (about John Tower). Your time reference is insightful. --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:09, 26 January 2007 (EST)

Thanks for your superb improvement to the [[Chappaquiddick]] entry. I didn't realize it is a separate island! --[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:38, 31 January 2007 (EST)

:Oddly enough, I was just about to add something to it... a quotation from a New York Times editorial. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:52, 31 January 2007 (EST)

*Whoops! I didn't realize I had the font in blue. Thanks for catching that! ~ [[User:SharonS|SharonS]] 18:39, 11 February 2007 (EST)

== King James Bible ==
''I have no idea what that last edit is about. Seems completely wrong. What the heck is "REAL Douay-Rheims?" Is it a reliable source? Seems to be pushing some point of view.''
:Please don't revert corrections unless you have at least '''some''' source to back it. The ancient texts were lost at the time of the KJV; it couldn't be based on them. It is well known that the KJV borrowed from the Douay Old Testament. --[[User:Luke-Jr|Luke-Jr]] 11:15, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

== Herman Melville ==
Dpbsmith, thanks for your reply. I don't know what happened to my Melville comments about its shift in popularity. That's OK, the entry looks great the way it is now. Please feel free to add to the content your fascinating material about the NY Times obituaries that you have on the talk page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:01, 3 February 2007 (EST)

== Work in progress ==

Kentish Sir Byng stood for his King, 
Bidding the crop-headed Parliament swing: 
And, pressing a troop unable to stoop 
And see the rogues flourish and honest folk droop, 
Marched them along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song. 

God for King Charles! Pym and such carles 
To the Devil that prompts `em their treasonous parles! 
Cavaliers, up! Lips from the cup, 
Hands from the pasty, nor bite take nor sup 
Till you`re--- 

CHORUS.---Marching along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song. 

Hampden to hell, and his obsequies` knell 
Serve Hazelrig, Fiennes, and young Harry as well! 
England, good cheer! Rupert is near! 
Kentish and loyalists, keep we not here 

CHORUS.---Marching along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song? 

Then, God for King Charles! Pym and his snarls 
To the Devil that pricks on such pestilent carles! 
Hold by the right, you double your might; 
So, onward to Nottingham, fresh for the fight, 

CHORUS.---March we along, fifty-score strong, 
Great-hearted gentlemen, singing this song! 

''Kentish:'' the county of Kent was a Royalist stronghold.

''Sir Byng:'' appears to be Browning's invention, not a real person.

''Crop-headed:'' Oliver Cromwell and his followers were Puritans, and many of them wore their hair cut short, an unusual style at the time. See also [[Roundheads]].

''Parliament:'' Before the Civil War, the English Parliament did not play an important role in the government of England. The Civil War pitted Parliament against the King, with Parliament ultimately winning a much more powerful role. Parliament, and its supporters, the Parliamentarians, were the opponents of King Charles.

''swing:'' i.e. Byng thought that the Parliamentarians should be hanged for treason.

''Pym:'' John Pym (1584-1643), leader of the Long Parliament.

''carles:'' variant of "churl," a rude, ill-bred person

''parles:'' Words. Probably also intended to echo "Parliament."

''Lips from the cup:'' Cavaliers are often portrayed as jolly, devil-may-care types who liked their wine, women, and song, as contrasted with the Puritans, who were, well, puritanical.

''Hampden to hell:'' John Hampden, (1595—1643), a champion of Parliament.

Hazelrig:

Fiennes:

Young Harry:

Rupert: Prince Rupert, the German nephew of King Charles, who led a thousand Royalists in a cavalry battle against the Parliamentarians at the Battle of Powick Bridge.

Onward to Nottingham:

===Thanks===

On second thought you're probably right; I unblocked him.

Thanks for the heads up.

--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 13:37, 12 February 2007 (EST)

Why do you and JoshuaZ keep refering to "Middle Schoolers"? and what does that have to do with any debate? --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 11:21, 14 February 2007 (EST)

:Hmmm... I thought I had seen that somewhere, but I guess you're telling me it's a mistake. The original article in Wikipedia said "It was created by a World History class of 58 homeschooled teenagers." So I guess I should say "teenager," not "middle-schooler." Sorry.

:It's not directly relevant to any debate, but it certainly affects ''my'' understanding of the site, the project, what's appropriate, and how I should interact with other users. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:28, 14 February 2007 (EST)

::"Teenager" would be accurate. There are not many non-teenage middle-schoolers, though they are certainly welcome also. Also, as time goes by, many of the original teenagers are quickly becoming adults.

::Somewhere else someone (Joshua, I think) speculated that the requirement that entries be clean here was motivated by the age of many users. That's certainly a consideration that sometimes is important. But the bigger reason is to keep the entries on a high level, just as a real encyclopedia would.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:33, 14 February 2007 (EST)

::: I don't know what you mean by a high level in that regard. Britannica has articles on articles on human reproductive systems that I imagine you might consider inappropriate to have articles about and a variety of other, arguably even more "unclean" topics. It isn't clear to me what "cleanliness" has to do with high-mindedness (indeed, I would be tempted argue that if one is sufficiently high-minded everything becomes clean as they are just different parts of God's Creation). [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 12:43, 14 February 2007 (EST)

== Syntax ==

No need to "pretend" thanks for the catching that mistake. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 16:44, 15 February 2007 (EST)

== Appreciation for work on Robert Frost ==

Nice work on improving the Robert Frost entry!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:21, 17 February 2007 (EST)

== Homeschooling ==

Some good edits were caught up and lost in your recent deletions, please be more careful. [[User:Harpie snark|Harpie snark]] 14:50, 23 February 2007 (EST)

== IP or SYSOP? ==

We'd really like to make you a SYSOP, Dpbsmith. With more SYSOPs, we could then reopen new registrations and handle in influx of vandals more easily. You could recommend others to be SYSOP also. You could relinquish SYSOP power at any time, or simply choose not to exercise your powers.

Otherwise, I don't see how to protect your IP from blocking unless you can email it to us at webmaster@conservapedia.com, as just suggested by another SYSOP.

I hope you can become a SYSOP!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 07:54, 24 February 2007 (EST)

:I ''very much'' appreciate the invitation, but I decline... I enjoy writing articles. I enjoy collaborative interaction. I enjoy spirited argument between people willing to play fair, maintain some level of civility, and take the risk of having their opinions changed.

:I don't enjoy fighting vandals and don't want to do the heavy lifting. When the system isn't too slow it's almost as easy to revert an article "manually" as by clicking "rollback" which is 90% of fighting vandalism, anyway.

:(I know you don't believe it, but Wikipedia's stability rests more on the community of editors than the sysops, and Conservapedia's best shot at staying ahead of the vandals is to attract a sufficiency of ordinary editors.)

:Thanks again. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:43, 24 February 2007 (EST)

== [[Real numbers]] ==

I'm fine with your edits (I would argue that decimal representations are always infinite but this may be a nitpick). The main causes of the pain were the previous article insisting that the reals contain "infinite values" and the notion that the real numbers *exclude* anything (since if one wants to talk about them that way, one might as well say they exclude cows and deities). Regarding your other comments, I'm not sure of a general name for the procedure, however the motivation for going to the reals that a mathematician would most likely give is that one wants to be able to take limits. As for infinities, that's complicated and can be dealt with in a variety of different ways depending on what one means by infinity. Wikipedia has a few good articles on these topics. I would recommend [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_arithmetic cardinal arithmetic] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordinal_number ordinal number] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extended_reals extended reals] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surreal_number surreal numbers] as different examples of ways of incorporating infinity. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 19:26, 24 February 2007 (EST)

Hallo Dpbsmith,

you wrote:

"What was your rationale for this edit? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 10:08, 25 February 2007 (EST)"

Dpb, not many people know this, but every member of the College of Cardinals is automatically a Doctor of Divinity. Other degrees are also possible, though they would normally be granted through one of the several Pontifical Academies. But in every case, cardinals would already have an undergraduate degree that they received in the process of becoming priests. (Although, technically, a non-priest could become a cardinal; however, this has not happened since the Middle Ages, before the College of Cardinals was founded).

[[User:Hiram Whickermeister III]]

Best regards,

Whick

== Earth article unprotection ==

Thank you for your kind request. I composed a lengthy response to you but unfortunately it was lost due to Conservapedia "hiccuping" and me not saving it. I will remove the protection now. Again, thank you for your kind request. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 16:00, 1 March 2007 (EST)conservative

== pH ==

Yeah, that's why I said "roughly" [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 11:12, 4 March 2007 (EST)

== Your thanks is appreciated regarding my making Conservapedia more factual in regards to the Intelligent Design article ==

Your thanks is appreciated regarding my making Conservapedia more factual in regards to the Intelligent Design article and I wanted to let you know I changed my edit again in order to make it more precise. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:54, 6 March 2007 (EST)conservative

==Articles For Deletion==
When posting for AFD please create an AFD page for the page in question. --[[User:TimSvendsen|TimSvendsen]] 10:16, 7 March 2007 (EST)

== Hey Smithy ==

It has been suggested to me that you are someone who knows what he/she is doing on this site. I am having trouble uploading an image file. Are you able to help? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:03, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:Believe me, I have ''no'' idea what I am doing on this site!

:Image uploading is very flaky. I get error messages about two-thirds of the time. I have no idea why and haven't bothered to ask. What ''seems'' to help is changing the filename, i.e. if it doesn't work try changing the name. But maybe that's just coincidence. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:06, 8 March 2007 (EST)

::Thanks. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 20:08, 8 March 2007 (EST)

:::No quite sure how to contact the webmaster... I suppose we could try leaving a note at [[User_talk:Conservapedia Webmaster]] but the fact that that page is blank isn't promising... and/or email to webmaster@conservapedia.com . [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:11, 8 March 2007 (EST)

== I trust your judgement regarding the prison delete it ==

I trust your judgement regarding the prison material so delete it. I can't investigate the material right now and block possible parody people because i am researching something for Andy. Let me know if you get into a edit war. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:12, 10 March 2007 (EST)conservative

== I permanently banned the troll Christian Concern ==

I permanently banned the troll "Christian Concern". No need to get Andy involved. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:30, 10 March 2007 (EST)conservative

:While you revel in that block, please block another harmful user - (explicative)Saddam. It would be greatly appreciated. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 22:32, 10 March 2007 (EST)

==the homeschooling thing==
No, I in fact did not read the line you sent me, as I was not aware of it. The word that stuck out as making the whole insulting was "schizophrenic", and that made it sound as though Conservapedia should be treated with contempt.

But after reading your follow-ups, I don't think you intended that at all, so it is me who should be apologizing. And I do. So now, let's get our collective posteriors in gear and make it better than it is. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 12:44, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

==[[Bible]] article improvements==
Although it needs some filling in regarding the subheadings mentioned in the talk page, that article itself was improved to the point of being original. Check it out. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:24, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

I've seen too many articles here that suffer from lack of info; it was like someone created an article, threw in a single sentence, pronouced it good, then left. I don't like working like that! There will be additional info and pics added before the week is out to make it look better. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 21:39, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

== a few questions... ==

:a) First, Conservapedia has a policy of original material only, no copying (except short, properly attributed quotations, of course).
::and where may I have found this "policy"? its not on [[The Conservapedia Commandments]] page...

:b) Second, the GFDL license does not allow re-use of GFDL material unless you follow the GFDL rules. Conservapedia itself does not license its material under the GFDL, so re-using it here breaks one of the most important GFDL rules.
::so if conservapedia does not use the GFDL (which I should have realized, my apologies), and there is not a link to the license in use in the lower-left corner like most mediawiki-based sites have, what license is the content of conservapedia under?

– [[User:frijole|Fʀɪɺøʟɛ]] ( [[User_talk:Frijole|тɐʟк]] • [[Special:Contributions/Frijole|¢ʘи†ʀ¡βs]] ) 12:54, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T01:23:36Z

Frijole: fixed my sig

Talk:Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T01:22:52Z

Frijole:

Joseph McCarthy

2007-03-13T01:21:55Z

Frijole: fleshed it out a little, honoring this great anti-communist warrior, based on the biased article from wikipedia, which is under the gfdl

''' Joseph Raymond McCarthy''' ([[November 14]], [[1908]] – [[May 2]], [[1957]]) was a great [[Republican Party (United States)|Republican]] [[United States Senate|U.S. Senator]] from the state of [[Wisconsin]] between 1947 and 1957. Beginning in 1950, McCarthy became the most visible public figure to stand up against [[communist]] infiltration of the [[United States]]. He was noted for making unsubstantiated claims that there were large numbers of [[Communist party|Communists]] and [[Soviet Union|Soviet]] spies and sympathizers inside the federal government. Ultimately, his tactics led to his being discredited by the [[Mainstream media]] and censured by the [[United States Senate]] as a result of pressure from Communist infiltrators. The term "[[McCarthyism]]," coined in 1950 in reference to McCarthy's practices, was soon applied to similar anti-communist pursuits in an attempt to continue smearing the name of this great American.

Born and raised on a Wisconsin farm, McCarthy earned a law degree at [[Marquette University]] in 1935 and was elected as a [[Circuit (subnational entity)|circuit]] judge in 1939, the youngest in state history.

At age 33, McCarthy bravely volunteered for the [[United States Marine Corps]] and served during [[World War II]]. He successfully ran for United States Senate in 1946, defeating [[Robert M. La Follette, Jr.]] After several years in the Senate, McCarthy rose suddenly to national fame in 1950 when he brought to light the fact that "members of the Communist Party and members of a spy ring" were employed in the [[United States Department of State|State Department]].

McCarthy made charges of Communist infiltration of the State Department, the administration of [[Harry Truman|President Truman]], [[Voice of America]], and a [[United States Army]] research laboratory. He also revealed the presence of communists, communist sympathizers, and disloyal citizens outside of government as well. With the highly publicized [[Army-McCarthy hearings]] of 1954, McCarthy's support and popularity began to fade due to the efforts of the mainstream media. Later in 1954, a special Senate committee was appointed to study and evaluate McCarthy's methods and actions. Following the recommendations of this committee, and no doubt under the influence of communists and communist sympathizers, the full Senate voted to censure Senator McCarthy by a vote of 67 to 22, making him one of the few senators ever to be disciplined in this fashion. McCarthy died in [[Bethesda Naval Hospital]] on [[May 2]], [[1957]], at the age of 48. The cause of his death was variously reported as acute [[hepatitis]] and [[cirrhosis]] by the media in an attempt to further smear the name of this great American, even in his death.

Brahmin

2007-03-13T01:07:50Z

Frijole: Brahmans moved to Brahmin: correct spelling

The Highest cast in [[Hinduism]], made up of priest and scholars.

Brahmans

2007-03-13T01:07:50Z

Frijole: Brahmans moved to Brahmin: correct spelling

#REDIRECT [[Brahmin]]

Template:Cite book

2007-03-13T00:59:08Z

Frijole:

<includeonly><cite class="book" style="font-style:normal" {{
#if: {{{ref|}}}
|{{#ifeq:{{{ref}}}|none||id="{{{ref}}}"}}
|{{#if:{{{last|}}} | {{#if:{{{year|}}} | id="Reference-{{{last}}}-{{{year}}}" }} }}
}}>{{
#if: {{{author|}}}{{{last|}}}
| {{
#if: {{{authorlink|}}}
| [[{{{authorlink}}}|{{
#if: {{{last|}}}
| {{{last}}}{{ #if: {{{first|}}} | , {{{first}}} }}
| {{{author}}}
}}]]
| {{
#if: {{{last|}}}
| {{{last}}}{{ #if: {{{first|}}} | , {{{first}}} }}
| {{{author}}}
}}
}}
}}{{
#if: {{{author|}}}{{{last|}}}
| {{ #if: {{{coauthors|}}} | <nowiki>;</nowiki> {{{coauthors}}} }}
}}{{
#if: {{{origdate|}}}
| <nowiki>[</nowiki>{{{origdate}}}]
| {{
#if: {{{origyear|}}}
| {{
#if: {{{origmonth|}}}
| <nowiki>[</nowiki>{{{origmonth}}} {{{origyear}}}]
| <nowiki>[</nowiki>{{{origyear}}}]
}}
}}
}}{{
#if: {{{date|}}}
| ({{{date}}})
| {{
#if: {{{year|}}}
| {{
#if: {{{month|}}}
| ({{{month}}} {{{year}}})
| ({{{year}}})
}}
}}
}}{{ #if: {{{author|}}}{{{last|}}} | .
}}{{
#if: {{{chapter|}}}
| "{{
#if: {{{chapterurl|}}}
| [{{{chapterurl}}} {{{chapter}}}]
| {{{chapter}}}
}}",}}{{
#if: {{{editor|}}}
| in {{{editor}}}:
}} {{
#if: {{{url|}}} | [{{{url}}} {{{title}}}] | {{{title}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{format|}}} | ({{{format}}})
}}{{
#if: {{{others|}}} | , {{{others}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{edition|}}} | , {{{edition}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{series|}}} | , {{{series}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{language|}}} | (in {{{language}}})
}}{{
#if: {{{publisher|}}}
| {{#if: {{{format|}}}{{{others|}}}{{{edition|}}} | , | . }}{{
#if: {{{location|}}}
| {{{location}}}: 
}}{{{publisher}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{pages|}}} | , {{{pages}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{doi|}}} | . [[Digital object identifier|DOI]]:[http://dx.doi.org/{{{doi|{{{doilabel|}}}}}} {{{doi}}}]
}}{{
#if: {{{id|}}} | . {{{id}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{isbn|}}} | . ISBN {{{isbn}}}
}}{{
#if: {{{oclc|}}} | . [[OCLC]] [http://worldcat.org/oclc/{{urlencode:{{{oclc}}}}} {{{oclc}}}]
}}{{
#if: {{{accessdate|}}}
| . Retrieved on [[{{{accessdate}}}]]
| {{
#if: {{{accessyear|}}}
| . Retrieved {{
#if: {{{accessmonth|}}}
| on [[{{{accessmonth}}} {{{accessyear}}}]]
| during [[{{{accessyear}}}]]
}}
}}
}}.{{ #if: {{{quote|}}} |  “{{{quote}}}”
}}</cite>&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Abook&rft.genre=book&rft.btitle={{urlencode:{{{title|}}}}}&rft.title={{urlencode:{{{title|}}}}}{{#if: {{{chapter|}}} | &rft.atitle={{urlencode:{{{chapter}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{last|}}} | &rft.aulast={{urlencode:{{{last}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{first|}}} | &rft.aufirst={{urlencode:{{{first}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{author|}}} | &rft.au={{urlencode:{{{author}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{date|}}}
| &rft.date={{urlencode:{{{date}}}}}
| {{#if: {{{year|}}} | &rft.date={{urlencode:{{{year}}}}} }} }}{{#if: {{{edition|}}} | &rft.edition={{urlencode:{{{edition}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{publisher|}}} | &rft.pub={{urlencode:{{{publisher}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{location|}}} | &rft.place={{urlencode:{{{location}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{pages|}}} | &rft.pages={{urlencode:{{{pages}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{series|}}} | &rft.series={{urlencode:{{{series}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{isbn|}}} | &rft.isbn={{{isbn}}} }}{{#if: {{{oclc|}}} | &rft_id=info:oclcnum/{{{oclc}}} }}{{#if: {{{doi|}}} | &rft_id=info:doi/{{urlencode:{{{doi}}}}} }}{{#if: {{{url|}}} | &rft_id={{urlencode:{{{url}}}}} }}"> </includeonly>

Template:Cite book

2007-03-13T00:56:07Z

Frijole: a complex template script for citing books from wikipedia

Template:Cite

2007-03-13T00:54:56Z

Frijole: an easy way to cite references from wikipedia

{{{author}}}, ''{{{title}}}'', [[{{{publisher}}}]], [[{{{date}}}]].