Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:CPanel

2007-08-18T03:53:23Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* Minor suggestion for several locked articles */ reply

[[User_talk:CPanel/Archive1|Archive 1]]

This is the username for the Conservapedia Student Panel. Please Submit any problems and requests you have here.

:Thank you for creating the student panel and letting us newcomers join your homeschool project. It's an honor to be here, and if there's anything I can do to help, don't hesitate to ask. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 18:20, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

::Your very welcome! Your work to help with this project has been amazing. We greatly appreciate all your contributions. ~ [[User:CPanel|CPanel]] 18:23, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

== Regarding a concise defintion of the theory of evolution ==

I am glad to hear that the panel came to a decision on this matter. I have a question though and '''it is probably based on the panel seeing a prior version of the article and not the current article. '''

'''Here is what a panel spokesperson wrote:'''

"We have decided that the article will not be changed in any major way. However, we agree that the article lacks an adequate, concise explanation of the Theory of Evolution." [http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:Theory_of_evolution]

'''Here is what the article states now and I only give certain key portions:'''

Today advocates of evolution no longer adhere to "natural selection" as the definition of evolution, but rather define it simply as any "change over time" in the genetic composition of a population....

Merriam-Webster's dictionary defines evolution as a "theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations." <ref>http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/evolution</ref>.....

Evolutionist [[Theodosius Dobzhansky]] wrote: "The process of [[mutation]] is the only known source of the new materials of genetic variability, and hence of evolution." <ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geneticquotes.html</ref> Evolutionists believe that the processes of mutation and natural selection created every species of life that we see on earth today after [[Origin of life|life first came about on earth]]. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v12/i1/improbable.asp</ref> Creationist scientists believe that mutations and natural selection would not cause [[macroevolution]]. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/mutations.asp</ref><ref>http://www.trueorigin.org/mutations01.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v12/i1/improbable.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3831</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/selection.asp</ref>

'''MY SUMMATION STATEMENT TO THE PANEL:'''

I think the above current version gives a concise and adequate explanation of the theory of evolution and Aschlafly concurrs. I am hoping that the panel agrees and that they based their statement above based on a prior version they read.

[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 18:32, 9 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

==References==
<references/>

:The article has been improved significantly since we began working on this issue. Some of the Panel may not be aware of these changes. They have been contacted, and after they give their opinions, we will post the results here. ~ [[User:CPanel|CPanel]] 18:41, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

:The above is actually non-sensical. No scientist equates natural selection with evolution. Natural selection is ''one'' of the processes that drives evolution, hence the need for a well written summary of the scientific aspect of the article. I cannot really participate in the Creationist part, as I am no expert, and it needs to be well written by one of the many experts here. Please feel free to refer to [[Talk:Basic Evolutionary Theory]]. Thanks for your time.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 18:36, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

Well, Conservative has once again taken it upon himself to delete an entire article comprising hours of work. I have corrected my link above, as he has moved it to the talk page, however the talk page is no longer connected to an article.--[[User:palmd001|PalMD]][[User_talk:palmd001|talk]] 18:58, 9 April 2007 (EDT)

== Restore of edit ==

After the decision was made, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Theory_of_evolution&diff=96126&oldid=96125 this edit] removed one of the referenced works. The Origin of Species is the text that started this all. It would be remiss to not include a link to the book for people who want verify references and quotations. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 19:23, 9 April 2007 (EDT)
: A response to this would be appreciated by many of us. --[[User:Jtl|Jtl]] 17:19, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

== The evolution decision ==

Can we take from this a general principle; that before criticizing something, we should always first explain what that thing is? [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 04:42, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:I 2nd this motion. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 08:31, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

== TOE ==

Why don't you semiprotect the article, so that newly registered or unregistered users are unable to edit (as they are usually the ones behind vandalism) but registered users can? It's really not the best decision to only limit it to the sysops '''Scorpion'''[[User_Talk:Scorpion|Step on me and get stung]] 08:07, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

:I agree with Scorpion on this point. There are a lot of editors here who wish to help improve the article. It is nice to see a decision finally made and hope that it does heaps of good for the site. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 08:31, 10 April 2007 (EDT)

=== Age of the earth ===
Panelists: if you're still watching the Talk:Theory of evolution page, then you might have run across the following dialogue:
<blockquote>
This site is a joke and doing this goes against my better judgement, but I will add my tuppence-worth. Radioactive dating of metamprphic rock will only give a date for the metamorphic event. All information is lost regarding the original date of the rocks formation as there is too much movement of isotopes through the mineral structure. In non-metamorphosed igneous rock, there are clues in the mineralogy and chemistry that a geologist would use to mark isotopic movement in or out of the mineral being dated and would, therefore, be aware of the potential for inaccuracies. All radioactive dating now uses isochron methodology to remove the possibility of error. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to look up isochrons and discover how they are used in modern geology. [[User:Splodge|Splodge]] 07:47, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
:The RATE Group have already thought of that. They discuss isochron dates extensively. Isochron dating ''does not'' "remove the possibility of error." This is another example of [[your theory does not work under my theory, so your theory must be wrong]].--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 09:58, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
:: Oh dearie me. The RATE group anomalies are produced by flawed experimental data. Isochron measurement requires that the rock samples are cogenetic (formed at the same time from a common pool of material within which the isotopes and elements are relatively homogenous). This was never done by RATE. For example, RATE geologist Steve Austin has stated (Austin, Steven A., ed., 1994. Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe) that the samples he took came from four different lava flows and an extracted phenocryst.
::Austin knows he will get the wrong results this way. In Austin, Steven A., 1988. "Grand Canyon lava flows: A survey of isotope dating methods," in Impact #178, he mentions that this kind of false isochron is well known and cites (Faure, Gunter, 1986. Principles of Isotope Geology, Second Edition. New York: John Wiley and Sons pp 145-147) on the matter.
::But truth is not the objective of these creationist groups. They generate propaganda in the form of pseudo-scientific articles that fool the layman into thinking that there is something suspect. To understand what is going on requires an in-depth understanding of the science that most people do not have. [[User:Splodge|Splodge]] 13:00, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
</blockquote>

Ladies and gentlemen, you need have no doubt that Steven A. Austin and his colleagues thought of every issue that Mr. Splodge mentioned--and furthermore, Mr. Splodge is probably passing on misinformation from Talk.Origins. If you want some detailed explanations, then may I suggest this article:

"[http://creationwiki.org/index.php?title=%28Talk.Origins%29_Isochron_date_of_young_Grand_Canyon_lava_is_excessively_old&oldid=41870 (Talk.Origins) Isochron date of young Grand Canyon lava is excessively old]." ''CreationWiki, The encyclopedia of creation science''. September 7, 2006, 00:26 UTC. Retrieved April 14, 2007.

Mind you, I don't suggest that Mr. Splodge is originating a fabrication. I merely suggest that he thinks he has a club with which to deal the ''coup de grâce'' to the young-earth position, when in fact he has a bruised reed. I submit this to you so that you may take it under advisement in deciding the direction of the article [[Theory of evolution]].--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]][[User talk:TerryH|Talk]] 19:19, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

If the RATE group have considered the issues I have raised, I assume you will be able to produce documentaion as to the fact? I do believe Conservapedia has a policy regarding unsubstantiated claims. Note that mine come directly from the publications of RATE group members.
And if it helps any, Mr Splodge did earn a degree in Geology from Edinburgh University some 25 years ago. [[User:Splodge|Splodge]] 07:37, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

== Macroevolution article - request a ruling ==

I am writing to you regarding the current [[Macroevolution]] article. I find the current article unacceptable and given your stated position on the [[Theory of evolution]] article I would like you to rule on this subject.

Currently the article has these statements:

"Paleontology, developmental biology, and comparative genomics contribute most of the empirical evidence for the known patterns and processes that can be classified as macroevolution."

Next the article has a section entitled:

"Methods of Macroevolution"

This of course assumes that macroevolution occurred.

If you could rule on this matter it would be appreciated. In the meantime, I am going to revert back to the non Pro-evolutionary theory version. I would appreciate it if the article critical of macroevolution were kept and the article kept protected. We don't need to be double minded on the macroevolution and theory of evolution issue. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 17:08, 14 April 2007 (EDT)conservative

:Conservative, you have taken the above out of context. The very first line stated that macroevolution was a hypothesized process, in other words an idea not a fact. The next line was what you posted above. It seems that you misunderstood the context of the paragraph. The second line about the three fields would not be in opposition to any stance on conservapedia due to the first line stating that macroevolution is an idea not a fact. To not say that the three fields did not provide information would be a lie, where did the idea come from? I do not see how the methods of macroevolution could be a problem considering the number of pages on the site that use methods. There is no double mindedness between macroevolution and ToE on this cite because the macroevolution makes no claims of its stance on rather it is fact or fiction it is just a description of what scientists would consider macroevolution. My statements were cited, from university sources not from freelance websites, and no claims were made as to if macroevolution was fact or fiction, this was due to a chat with Ed Poor about keeping the edits open and placing ideology into the page, let the reader decide. If this page was to be a problem then perhaps those students that planned to take the SAT should look else where for as it stands the previous edit, before I added information, would not have given enough information to make the article a use (hence the reason for the VSA flag at the top of the page, that conservative moved after he reverted my edits).--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 08:59, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

: It is a skeleton of information with only links to outside sources. The author takes no position on the merits. It is, altogether, neutral. What could possibly be wrong with it? -'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 17:11, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

:Referring conflicts to the panel is supposed to be a last resort. What efforts have you made to resolve your issues with the editors in question?

:I urge the panel to reject outright any case presented to them before every other avenue has been exhausted. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 17:31, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

:I back Tsumetai on this. There has not been adequate (if any) attempt to resolve the issue first. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 20:04, 14 April 2007 (EDT)
::I concur with Philip and Tsumetai. Along with missing the point of both "encyclopedia" and "wiki", the user has refused to engage in any other dispute resolution avenue. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 00:56, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

We need a ruling or something about this. Conservative keeps reverting the edits and has locked the page many times. He has yet to talk with anyone about the direction of the page and basicly has hijacked it from both users and sysops. Are we to assume that the page is to be locked until further notice to allow for edits/reverts only by Conservative? Could someone please give some direction so that I know if I am wasting my time by editing pages to have them hijacked?--[[User:Tims|TimS]] 11:24, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== Submitting "[[Adult stem cell]]" ==

I believe there is a bias inherent in this article that has been undefended. It currently strikes an un-encyclopedic tone which I have tried to remedy to no avail. CPanel, please inspect [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Adult_stem_cells&diff=107840&oldid=107836 this comparison] to tell us which version is more encyclopedic, and more neutral.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 22:56, 14 April 2007 (EDT)

== Submitting "[[homosexuality]]" ==

I am also submitting the article on [[homosexuality]] for review by the panel. The allegations are threefold. First, it is utterly offensive, sending the message that homosexuals are individuals on the "outside" of a society that condemns them, when it is not the case. This offensive characteristic of the article is doubly damaging, as bigotry is evil for its own sake, and for the harm it causes anyone who may ''be'' homosexual, upon hearing the outrageous claims of the article. Second, the citations on the article are poorly sourced, explained, and blown out of proportion to deliberately exaggerate the medical "harms" of homosexuality. I suggest that the Panel engage in a full review of the cited sources, in comparison with other sources with which I will provide them. Third, the article is not "family friendly." It encourages a small-minded view of the world that leads to bigotry, hatred based on immutable characteristics, and on a simpler note, the diseases it describes, etc., are objectively not something that someone would want children to view, which I understand is the main goal of this site. I have tried to address these problems on the article since day one of my involvement here; rather than get caught up in another edit war, which is unproductive, this is a more responsible track.-'''AmesG'''[http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:AmesG yo!] 10:48, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:I say it should be deleted for violating commandment 3. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 16:49, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

== What happened to my request? ==

1. What happened to my request that you explain your bizarre decision in relation to the Theory of evolution page?

2. Could you explain your bizarre decision in relation to theTheory of evolution page? --[[User:Horace|Horace]] 19:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

== SYSOP/Adminstrator Hojimachong is making big pro-evolutionist changes in the article now ==
'''''Statistics are inherently liberal''''' --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]]

Admistrator Hojimachong is now making big pro-evolutionist changes in the changes in the [[Theory of evolution]] article as can be seen by this edit: http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Theory_of_evolution&diff=109823&oldid=109791 The panel clearly said they did not want the direction of the article changed. Hojimachong seems to think the panel's decision is irrelevant and that Hojimachong is the one to decide. I do not think this is the way things should be done. I do think something needs to be done about this matter. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:56, 15 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
:For the love of a higher power, they aren't "pro-evo", they're statistical facts. Statistics (i.e. "scientists agree that the ToE is valid") aren't evil. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 21:59, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::Please take your alleged evolutionists "facts" to Wikipedia where they have a much lower threshhold in terms of what is considered a fact. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:02, 15 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
:::: LOL! Conservative, take a math class. Learn the definition of "statistic". It's an ''indisuputable fact'' that the godless, liberal, atheist scientific community has a virtually unanimous consensus about this evil, godless theory called "evolution". --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:07, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::::The irony is almost too much to bear. It must really irk you that no one is actually reading your, uh, diatribe, but that thousands read the one on wikipedia. [[User:Etaroced|Etaroced]] 22:08, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::The evolutionist have cried wolf over and over and over again. I saw your "citing much evidence to support the theory" and immediately reverted without bothering to even look at your "religioustolerance" and pbs citations. Read the [[Theory of evolution]] article which the panel approved and doesn't want to see changed in terms of its direction. Stop trying to be king of Conservapedia. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:13, 15 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
::::::"KING of Conservapedia?" You arrogant, ignorant... well, perhaps we're crying "wolf" because we are actually trying to build a ''conserevative'' encyclopedia. You are trying to build a widely censored grab-bag of half-truths. Note that I actually want to discuss this with you. Yes, consider that first sentence a personal attack. I'm through with people who don't actually want to build an encyclopedia. You are a hypocrite, a liar, and the reason that Conservapedia did not succeed like it could. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:17, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:::::::::Thank you for showing the panel that you are a beacon of reasonableness. I am sure they are very impressed now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 22:25, 15 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
::::::::::You're hardly a bastion of reasonableness, mr. Lock my talk page for two weeks. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 22:27, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
::::::::::::That was purely a accidental mistake on my part. If memory serves I was being pestered by AmesG and I merely forget to unlock it after I locked it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 23:01, 15 April 2007 (EDT)conservative
:::::::::::::Do I have to separate you two?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 22:30, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
I haven't looked at the article so have no opinion on the relevance or otherwise of the statistics that Hojimachong added, but it is not correct to paint statistics as neutral facts, because it is ''possible'' to introduce bias by the selection of statistics to include. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:34, 15 April 2007 (EDT)
:OK, fair enough. The article already has enough statistics which refute evolution. --[[User:Hojimachong|'''Hojimachong''']][[User_Talk:Hojimachong|talk]] 23:39, 15 April 2007 (EDT)

== Panel submissions ==

I was under the impression that submitting a case to the panel was supposed to be a last resort for major conflicts only. If this is still the case, I suggest setting some rules to prevent abuse; after all, you are all students and you have better things to do with your time than adjudicate every petty squabble which comes up. To that end, I submit the following:

No user should submit an article to the panel for review without first:

*clearly stating their objections on the talk page of the relevant article
*inviting discussion of these objections
*inviting comments from any editors involved in the dispute, on their personal talk pages

If the discussion does not lead to a conclusion, the user should then:

*propose at least one possible solution to the conflict ('everybody do it my way' does not count)
*request the opinion of at least one '''neutral''' sysop

I don't think this is particularly radical; it's just good editorial practice in a group environment. If users can learn to solve their disputes through discussion, the project as a whole can only benefit.

I would also suggest that any user who attempts to bypass any reasonable dispute resolution process, and instead chooses to waste the panel's time by getting you to fight their battles for them, should be censured, up to and including permanent blocking if necessary. [[User:Tsumetai|Tsumetai]] 07:57, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

== Submitting [[CP:RFA]] and [[CP:RFB]] for official ratification ==

I hereby submit the pages linked to by the above redirects for transformation into official Conservapedia policies, where the result of the vote is binding. The current state of the RfA process simply takes potential applicants to an enitity, whether it be Sharon, Philip, Andy, or the Panel, which can decide, regardless of the community's desire, whether an individual becomes a sysop. I respectfully ask that you consider my request. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]])</code> 06:53, 22 April 2007 (EDT)

----

==References tag to allow references to be used above; please do not remove.==
<references/>

== HELLO? HELLO? ==

Is there anybody in there? I posted two questions above and have received no response. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] [[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]] 20:17, 22 April 2007 (EDT)
:So did I. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • [[Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA]])</code> 18:01, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

== I further solved the issue of the definition of the evolutionary theory ==

I realize that the "defining of what evolution is" is a issue the panel is discussiong.

Here is a revision of the article that was recently made:

"Today advocates of evolution no longer adhere to "natural selection" as the definition of evolution, but rather define it simply as "change over time" in the gene pool of a population over time through such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift. [http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolution]"

I think now that what the theory of evolution is has now been adequately explained. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:18, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
:Glad you think that, but it's still not a good definition. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 01:31, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

== Thank you indeed ==

It is a great day for me. Thank you for this privilege.

--[[User:Joaquín Martínez]], [[User talk:Joaquín Martínez|talk]] 15:15, 16 May 2007 (EDT)

== Request: Define the audience, and comment on articles written at too high/low a level ==
I'd like the panel to come up with some statement of the age level we should be keeping in mind as the audience for Conservapedia, and I'd like the panel (and only the panel) to indicate... in some gentle way... articles that are written at too high or too low a level.

I'm thinking high-school-plus-or-minus two years (i.e. junior high school through college sophomore). [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:25, 28 May 2007 (EDT)

:Thanks for the idea. The panel is working on it now. ~ [[User:CPanel|CPanel]] 20:03, 28 May 2007 (EDT)
::Please don't define it in terms that only an American would understand. We don't have "junior high schools" here, and I think "college" has a different meaning. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 03:06, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
::::Apologies. I was thinking of "high school" as the range User:Fox delineated below. A college sophomore would be twenty. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 05:38, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
:::In England, that would encompass ages 12 through 17 or thereabouts. [[User:Fox|Fox]] 04:55, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

:Thoughts: '''World Book''' as one possible model
:I've sometimes used the phrase "like ''World Book'', not like the ''Britannica.''" On checking, I see that ''World Book Encyclopedia'' seems to avoid any direct statement of an age range, but does emphasize its direct connection to "students" and to school curricula.
:It says in fact that it is "Straightforward and understandable to students of all ages and levels"[http://www.worldbook.com/wb/About?difference] (which, literally, would include college students, graduate students and medical students) but says at [http://www.worldbook.com/wb/About?history History of World Book]
:However, it says its content is guided by research on how students use World Book, and "Last year, World Book received about 50,000 data cards from students in grades 3-12" suggesting that they are thinking of "students" aged 8 to 17.
:They say elsewhere, in [http://www.worldbook.com/wb/About?history History of World Book], that
::The first edition of The World Book Encyclopedia, issued in 1917, set a new direction for encyclopedia publishing. "As a rule," wrote Editor in Chief Michael Vincent O'Shea in the preface to that first edition, “encyclopedias are apt to be quite formal and technical. A faithful effort has been made in The World Book Encyclopedia to avoid this common defect.”
::The 1930’s saw the formation of an Editorial Advisory Board composed of distinguished educators. The Board launched an analysis of typical school curriculums, which provided the editors with data on the subjects being studied in all grades from kindergarten to high school. Today, World Book editors continue to develop content that meets curriculum needs.
:[[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 05:38, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

:Thoughts: What to '''do''' if an article is too detailed/technical
:I would think that it would be a mistake remove valid material just because it is too detailed, too technical, or written for too advanced an audience. It is also hard to ''adjust'' material down to a very different age group.
:I'm thinking that perhaps an article that is too advanced might be ''moved'' from [[XYZ]] to [[XYZ (advanced)]], and [[XYZ]] be started with a template requesting a more elementary article, and of course a "see also" section linking to [[XYZ (advanced)]].
:Or something like that. Don't delete anything, but make it clear that Conservapedia has a requirement for an (essentially new) elementary article on the same topic. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:02, 29 May 2007 (EDT)
::Just a thought, not a suggestion per se: I seem to recall seeing a comment from Ed Poor - I will try to find the exact quote asap - which stuck in my mind as a sensible observation. It was along the lines of, "A reader shouldn't have to go away and consult another textbook in order to be able to understand an article." [[User:Fox|Fox]] 06:13, 29 May 2007 (EDT) Added: To clarify, it was at [[Talk:Gene expression]] and the associated edit summaries in the history. [[User:Fox|Fox]] 06:31, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

:::Advanced and simplified articles would be one way to go. Another would be to have a simplified summary at the start of a more-advanced article. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:04, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

::::Thank you everyone for your great ideas. We have agreed upon a statement of the appropriate age level and it is posted [[Conservapedia:Article level|here]]. ~ [[User:CPanel|CPanel]] 16:39, 1 June 2007 (EDT)

== Situation on Template:Christianity ==

A situation has come up on [[Template:Christianity]] as regards whether or not [[Mormons]] are Christians. I have reverted the page to its original form and will keep it frozen pending a decision. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. Site Sheriff(Sysop)[[User_talk:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 21:44, 11 June 2007 (EDT)

== Adolf ==

Adolf Hitler's name is spelt differently in the same paragraph. (Adolph and Adolf) The correct spelling is Adolf. -- The preceeding unsigned comment was added by [[User:Luojie|Luojie]]

== Evolution ==

A first stab at proposed changes to the [[theory of evolution]] page.

The '''theory of evolution''' is a term primarily used to describe two different concepts:
* The idea that organisms change over many generations through the process of [[variation]] and [[natural selection]]
* The idea that all life on Earth is descended from a single protocell, and differentiated into its various forms solely through the processes of random variation and natural selection.

While there is no controversy regarding the truth of the theory of evolution in the first sense, there is a great deal of public controversy regarding its truth in the second sense. Specifically, [[creationism]] is an alternate viewpoint which holds that all life is ''not'' related, and life did ''not'' develop entirely by the processes of variation and natural selection; rather, a Creator designed and created life in a number of ''different'', ''distinct'', and ''unrelated'' forms, and endowed that life with the capacity to adapt to a changing environment through the processes of variation and natural selection.

== Mechanisms of evolution ==
The following mechanisms are proposed for the processes of evolution:
=== Origin of life ===
* [[Metabolism world hypothesis]]: the hypothesis that life originated with a spontaneous non-genetic metabolica cycle, and later evolved into cells;
* [[RNA world hypothesis]]: the hypothesis that life originated with RNA, which had the capacity to act both as gene and enzyme;
=== Variation ===
* [[Random mutation]]: random changes in the genetic code;
* [[Recombination]]: targetted shifts in large sections of the genetic code, primarily through [[sexual reproduction]]
=== Selection ===
* [[Natural selection]]: the removal of less adapted lifeforms from the environment
* [[Genetic drift]]: the gradual elimination of genetic variation from a gene pool through [[stochiastic]] functions;

[[User:Ungtss|Ungtss]] 22:21, 24 June 2007 (EDT)

== Minor suggestion for several locked articles ==

I've noticed that many of the locked articles tend to capitalize nearly every word in the headings of an article. Here is an example from [[Theory of Evolution]]:
* 1 Mutations and the Life Sciences in General
* 2 Little Consensus Regarding an Evolutionary Process
* 3 Genetic Code, Processing of Biological Data, and Biological Information
* 4 Evolutionary theory and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation‎
* 5 Lack of Any Clear Transitional Forms
* 6 The Fossil Record and the Evolutionary Position
* 7 Paleoanthropology
* 8 Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium
* 9 Implausible Explanations and the Evolutionary Position
* 10 Statements of Design
* 11 Theory of Evolution and the Scientific Journals
* 12 Effect on Scientific Endeavors Outside of Biology
* 13 Age of the Earth and Universe and the Theory of Evolution
* 14 Scientific Community Consensus and the Macroevolution Position
* 15 Social Effects of the Theory of Evolution
* 16 Further Reading (including free on-line versions)
* 17 See also
* 18 External Links
* 19 References
All this capitalization is difficult to read and, in my opinion looks rather awkward in the table of contents. Please consider changing these headings. Thank you. [[User:SigmaEpsilon|SigmaEpsilon]] 12:21, 16 August 2007 (EDT)

:They are titles, so I vote to capitalize them. ~ [[User:SharonS|Sharon]][[User talk:SharonS|Talk]] 21:35, 16 August 2007 (EDT)
::I think they're more like headings, not titles. If each one were the title of a book, I'd understand. Look any other encyclopedia's subdivisions. Does anyone else capitalize (nearly) every word? It just looks weird to me. I know you don't like being compared to Wikipedia, but ''content aside'', they do tend to have nice formatting on most of the articles. A quick check on a few random articles from Encyclopedia Britannica also shows no such over-capitalization. [[User:SigmaEpsilon|SigmaEpsilon]] 23:53, 17 August 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Conservative

2007-08-18T03:42:12Z

SigmaEpsilon: Bulleted list?

{{protected|Aschlafly}}

== George W. Bush a conservative? ==

Really, why is George W. Bush listed as a conservative? He's gladly helped to spend far more than the government is bringing in in taxes, and ballooned the budget to ridiculous, formerly inconceivable heights, he's promoted programs like No Child Left Behind, which gives the federal government more money and control of education, rather than eliminating the Department of Education, as a true conservative would, and he's gone along with all this horrible prescription drug benefit garbage, all the while never making a serious effort to fix our broken tax system or taking steps to free us from the onus of a completely worthless and hopeless social security program with no future. Hardly conservative. [[User:Flinker du|Flinker du]] 04:30, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

::I just have to add this gem contributed elsewhere by [[User:BDobbs|BDobbs]] [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Liberal&diff=80273&oldid=80267]:
:::''"one who adheres to principles of limited government, personal responsibility and moral virtue."''
:::When did George W. Bush become a Liberal? He's zero-for-three on that list...
::[[User:WhatIsG0ing0n|WhatIsG0ing0n]] 06:59, 16 April 2007 (EDT)

:While we're at it, how can George Washington be a conservative if conservativism did not arise until the 19th century as stated in the article. I am taking him off the list. --[[User:Wikidan81|Wikidan81]] 14:37, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

:The article includes ''"Return of prayer in school,"'' I'm going to guess this would mean like '''''The Lord's Prayer''''' and not the '''''Salaah'''''.

::And return of prayer to school isn't really conservative either - heck, most of American "conservatism" falls under propaganda to in fact increase the power and the size of the government. And I'd like to see what religion does with those values listed for conservatism... doesn't it, in fact, promote the opposite? [[User:Ninj4|Ninj4]] 20:08, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

::Probably no invocations to [[Nylarthotep]], either. The usual explanation for that is that Christians are the majority, so other, lesser religions just have to suck it up and endure. I wonder how well that'd go over in, say, [[Clearwater]], Florida? (Scientology world headquarters.)
::The First Amendment: proving once again that the Founding Fathers make our current politicians look like the retarded chimps they are. --[[User:BDobbs|BDobbs]] 17:06, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

:::George '''H'''. W. Bush isn't a conservative? Weird. --[[User:BDobbs|BDobbs]] 17:06, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

Why is George Washington a conservative? That's what I want to know.{{unsigned|PandaBear}}, June/July 2007

George W. Bush is not conservative. A conservative is one who wishes to preserve traditional laws, values, ideals, etc as opposed to "doing away with" the afformentioned items. Globalism[http://www.thefreedictionary.com/globalism 1] is not a tenet which is compatable with conservatism. It might even be considered one of the core principles of liberalism, because it seeks to do away with the traditional sovereignty of nations/states. George W. Bush is a globalist who seeks to undermine the basic sovereignty of the United States of America[http://www.spp.gov/ 2]. George W. Bush does not respect or desire to preserve the constitution for the United States of America[http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/powersurge_healy_lynch.pdf 3]. That document which might have been considered "liberal" at its conception, is sufficiently established so that it can now be considered a "traditional law."
A conservative stance on one issue (e.g. abortion) coupled with one or more liberal positions makes one a liberal. A conservative stance on every single issue immaginable coupled with one liberal position makes one a liberal. Someone can't be both. A "neocon" is a liberal who calls himself a conservative.

So could someone please explain again why he is on the list? with rational?

sources
1: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/globalism
2: http://www.spp.gov/
3: http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/powersurge_healy_lynch.pdf

[[User:Historiocality|Historiocality]] 14:44, 4 July 2007 (EDT)

==definition==
Could someone explain what is meant by "Economic allocative efficiency"? Sounds a bit like gobbledeygood to me. [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 18:08, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

==The List==
The list that is in the article refers to an article written by Jonah Goldberg, who was quoting John Derbyshire, who, in turn was quoting, ''John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge, in The Right Nation , tick off the six fundamentals of classical, Burkean, Anglo-Saxon conservatism''. It was a fun romp tracking it down. --[[User:Cracker|Cracker]][[User_Talk:Cracker|talk]] 00:51, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

If The List includes the list of conservative presidents, it would behoove you to remove Lincoln from the list. Conservatives of Lincoln's time supported the status quo, including the existence of slavery.

== Inaccurate information ==

"Some Conservatives hold a strong libertarian conviction in the belief that the state should not interfere with the economy, gun control, and the redistribution of wealth."

This statement could not be further from the truth. Conservatives are the exact opposite of libertarians. To say someone is conservative and libertarian would be contradictory in terms. This statement should be some REPUBLICANS hold a strong libertarian conviction in the belief that the state should not interfere with the economy, gun control, and the redistribution of wealth. This statement would be true because Republicans are LIBERALS economically and would in fact not want government interference with the economy. Therefore I am deleting this statement from the article due to the inaccuracy of the statement.
--[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 00:40, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*Around here, LiberalMedia, we communicate. Try it the next time. I have removed all of your changes. And I will continue to do so until you lower yourself to using this discussion as it was intended to be. FYI, libertarians do not believe in the government using forced income redistribution! --[[User:TK|TK]] 02:32, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

:*I never said that libertarians believe in using forced income redistribution by the government. Where did I say that in my paragraph above. If you could read, I was saying that conservatives do not hold the same view as libertarians on the redistribution of wealth. People that are economically conservative want forced income redistribution by increasing taxes, etc. People that are libertarians don't want the government to increase taxes and definitely do not want the government using forced income redistribution. How are users intended to use this discussion? Is it to give false information and make this site look like a joke? Or is it to give factual information. Hopefully, it is the latter. --[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 03:08, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

::*Hey, LiberalMedia, you are the one who wanted the text that made the blanket statement that Libertarians side with the Democrats on economic policy, it wasn't me. One of they keystones of Democratic Party policy has been income resdistribution, not the Republicans, lol. You vandalizing the page as you did, adding the "Some Conservatives hold a strong libertarian conviction in the belief that the state should not interfere with the economy, gun control, and the redistribution of wealth. '''(This statement makes no sense)"''' will earn you a time-out. Perhaps Wikipedia will better tolerate your point of view? --[[User:TK|TK]] 03:31, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

:::* Where did I say that the Libertarians side with the Democrats? I never said that, in fact, I was stating the opposite. You probably just realized your error and are now trying to cover your behind. Did you even read my first paragraph? I never mention the word Democrat once in the paragraph. So where did you get this statement that "Libertarians side with the Democrats on economic policy." You must have made that up because I never said that. Libertarians side with Democrats on political issues and with Republicans on economic policy. Conservatives which this article is about side with Republicans on political issues and Democrats on economic policy.

*Your paragraph read: ''"In America, conservatives tend to align with the [[Republican Party]] on social issues and tend to align with the [[Democratic Party]] on economic issues."'' Since the major tenet of Democratic Party economic policy is economic redistribution, that would indeed imply Libertarians buy into that. Sorry if you cannot see my point. I have been involved with public policy, at the federal level for over twenty years, working with both parties. I think I can judge fairly well, the difference between what Republican and Democratic policies are. That doesn't excuse you being a vandal, which is by its very nature, intellectual dishonesty.--[[User:TK|TK]] 03:53, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

:* The error that you are making is thinking the Democratic Party is the same as the Libertarians. Why would it imply Libertarians to buy into economic redistribution if Democratic Party believes in it? The Democratic Party disagrees with the Libertarians on economic policy.

*Are you in Grade School? If you state, as your paragraph did, that Conservatives align, generally, with the Democratic Party on economic issues, that is saying they must buy into income redistribution. Conservatives do not buy into that. Surely you know that. Just as those Conservatives with a strong libertarian bent also do not. You are a vandal, I will not continue to reply.--[[User:TK|TK]] 04:04, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

:* No, I am in college. Conservatives do buy into income redistribution. That is exactly what I have been saying the entire time. Finally, you were able to figure it out. Conservatives can never have a "strong libertarian bent." They are complete opposite. Obviously realized that I am right and that is why you aren't going to reply anymore. How am I vandal? I am only a vandal if giving correct information on this site is considered vandalism.--[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 04:11, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*Goodness! You, or your 'rents should demand your tuition back. Your professors are doing a crappy job, teaching you Conservatives believe in income redistribution. ROFLMAO!! --[[User:TK|TK]] 11:01, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

:* TK, you are confusing conservatives with Republicans. Conservatives are not the same thing and have different views on economic policy. So if the statement "Conservatives believe in income redistribution" is not true then it means that Republicans believe in income redistribution. I am certain that you will agree that Republicans do not want income redistribution. Thus, conservatives want income redistribution.--[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 14:13, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*That statement of yours, above, LiberalMedia, is utter nonsense. Please provide a citation, other than some moronic revisionist college professor. If you keep changing things to suit your fancy, I will either restrict you, or lock the article. --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] [[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]] 18:26, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

:*This is the definition of conservatism given by [http://www.dictionary.com Dictionary.com]:
::''A political philosophy or attitude emphasizing respect for traditional institutions, distrust of government activism, and opposition to sudden change in the established order.''

:Now look at the definition of liberalism:
::''A political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor, and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties.''

:Which one does a free market fall under? Liberalism or Conservatism? The answer is liberalism. If you look at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_liberalism Wikipedia] they agree saying that economic liberalism is a free market ideal.

:The point that I am trying to make is that this article is talking about conservatism and its ideals. Not the Republican party agenda or anything of that matter. So when writing an article on it, it should be about conservative beliefs on social issues and economic issues. It doesn't make sense to start talking about economic liberalism because it is not the same as conservatism. Conservatism is about "big government" or to put it in terms you can understand, it is about government controls through established institutions(ex. taxes). Liberalism is about minimal government and freedom to do whatever you want, hence free market. In a truly liberal society there would be no government and it would be complete anarchy because everybody would have the freedom to do what they want.--[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 20:00, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

*I'm sorry, Liberalmedia, but most of us live in the here and now, the real world, where dogmatic thoughts, such as yours, mean very little. What things should mean, and what they actually are, usually are very different. I note you have nothing to back your nonsense about Conservatives supporting income redistribution, as opposed to favoring a generally flat tax, equal for all. This entry has nothing to do with either the Republican or Democrat political parties. --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] [[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]] 20:06, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

:*I never put that conservatives want income redistribution in the article. Maybe on this discussion page, but never in the article. In the article I only said a fact that conservatives align with the Republicans on social issues and Democrats on economic issues. Shouldn't an encyclopedia talk about what things mean and not talk about how they are in the moment? Otherwise, you would have to change this article every time the majority changes its opinion. Actually, conservative and liberal still mean the same thing today in the real world. It is just the ignorant people that think conservative means Republican and liberal means Democrat. Also, if you are suggesting that conservative is a synonym for Republican (which is what your advocating) then wouldn't the people that are liberal Republicans be an oxymoron. Or how about conservative Democrats? Do you understand?--[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 20:19, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

*What I understand is, you quite possibly might get an "A" in debate tactics, however as an intellectual, an "F". I never introduced any text here, or in the article, equating Conservative or Liberal with either American political party. That was you, and others. I am willing to concede, generally, that there are more "Conservatives" aligned with the Republican Party, than with the Democrat Party. Take a look at the article below.....provided for your edification. --~ [[User:TK|Terry]] [[User_talk:TK|Talk2Me!]] 21:20, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

*Looking at the latin origin of conservative, i.e. conservare, indicates that it means high credt for the existing, since it has proven its usefulness until now. Therefore, the direct opposite of conservative is progressive, which gives high regards simply because something is new. Liberal in its general sense means maximum freedom of the individual. It depends on the further circumstances, whether this agrees with a conservative or progressive point of view. The direct opposite of liberal rather is a state or society which takes care of as much as possible, probably called socialistic. However, the meaning of these terms depart often from their original meaning, if they are used to "label" political groups or parties. --[[User:SchiFra|SchiFra]] 13 April 2007

*"generally flat tax, equal for all." Surely such an idea is an oxymoron. A flat tax cannot be equal for all unless everyone was receiving the same wage, same benefits and existed in the same socio-economic group. How is it fair to tax someone living at or below the poverty line the same rate as someone earning 6 figures a year? It just doesn't make sense. And another point >> Terry; what's with the flaming. Very uncool.

==Goldwater Conservatives==
<blockquote>"During the campaign of 1964, [he] was our incorruptible standard-bearer," recalled William F. Buckley, Jr., in his 1998 obituary of Barry Goldwater, the career senator from Arizona, 34 years after the watershed. Goldwater, of course, was defeated resoundingly on Election Day, winning only six states. "It was the judgment of the establishment that Goldwater's critique of American liberalism had been given its final exposure on the national political scene," Buckley continued. "But then of course 16 years later the world was made to stand on its head when Ronald Reagan was swept into office on a platform indistinguishable from what Barry had been preaching."

Strange, then, that these days many commentators believe that Goldwater's conservatism was a different species from Reagan's and, especially, from George W. Bush's. Though admittedly an economic conservative, Goldwater has become an icon of opposition to social conservatism. When the 2004 Republican national convention showcased social liberals like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rudy Giuliani, George F. Will proclaimed, "[Goldwater's] kind of conservatism made a comeback." By "Goldwater conservatism" Will meant "muscular foreign policy backing unapologetic nationalism; economic policies of low taxation and light regulation; a libertarian inclination regarding cultural questions."

Will was merely restating the consensus view. Darcy Olsen, president of the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, argued on the fifth anniversary of Goldwater's death that "Goldwater conservative" had "a different meaning than just saying, 'I am a Republican,' because when you say 'I am a Republican,' people assume that you're involved in the Moral Majority. It's its own brand...very libertarian." Senator John McCain said that Goldwater "disliked the religious right, because he felt they were intolerant, because Barry was not only conservative, but he was also to a degree libertarian."

What does the notion that Goldwater was a libertarian mean? First, it suggests that the cultural Right has abandoned true conservatism. It implies that presidents like Reagan and Bush, who have relied heavily on socially conservative voters, deviate from Goldwater's rugged and pure frontier conservatism. And then there is the implication, appearing frequently in the mainstream media, that Republicans must move back in Goldwater's direction if they are to reclaim their intellectual credibility.

But this interpretation happens to be wrong: it overlooks the role of social issues in the origins of the conservative movement. William F. Buckley, Jr.'s, God and Man at Yale (1951) complained not only about economic collectivism but also about rampant agnosticism and atheism among Yale's faculty. Ever since, the conservative movement has been as concerned with religious and moral issues as with economic and libertarian ones. Goldwater's 1964 campaign actually shaped the social conservatism of the modern Republican Party in at least three crucial respects: his view of human nature and the American republic; his concern over the moral deterioration of American society; and his stand on several key policy questions.

Human Nature

Goldwater articulated a view of the American Founding and America's purpose, as well as the nature of man, that was fundamentally moral, even religious, in character. In the introduction to his bestselling The Conscience of a Conservative (1960), Goldwater argued, "The laws of God, and of nature, have no dateline." Conservative principles "are derived from the truths that God has revealed about his creation." In the first chapter, he (and his ghostwriter, L. Brent Bozell) wrote:

The root difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals of today is that Conservatives take account of the whole man, while the Liberals tend to look only at the material side of man's nature. The Conservative believes that man is, in part, an economic, an animal creature; but that he is also a spiritual creature with spiritual needs and spiritual desires. What is more, these needs and desires reflect the superior side of man's nature, and thus take precedence over his economic wants. Conservatism therefore looks upon the enhancement of man's spiritual nature as the primary concern of political philosophy.... Man's most sacred possession is his individual soul.

The 1964 Republican platform, the handiwork of committed Goldwaterites, declared:

Much of today's moral decline and drift—much of the prevailing preoccupation with physical and material comforts of life—much of today's crass political appeals to the appetites of the citizenry—can be traced to a leadership grown demagogic and materialistic through indifference to national ideals founded in devoutly held religious faith. The Republican Party seeks not to renounce this heritage of faith and high purpose; rather, we are determined to reaffirm and reapply it.

In his speech accepting the 1964 presidential nomination, Goldwater extolled "freedom under a government limited by the laws of nature and of nature's God." He warned that

those who elevate the state and downgrade the citizen must see ultimately a world in which earthly power can be substituted for Divine Will, and this Nation was founded upon the rejection of that notion and upon the acceptance of God as the author of freedom.

Reagan and Bush later echoed this language.

Goldwater decried the general moral decline of the time. On the campaign trail, he asked, "What's happening to us? What's happening to our America?" His campaign ran several television spots on this theme, which he called simply the "moral issue." In one commercial an announcer shouts, "Graft! Swindle! Juvenile delinquency! Crime! Riots!" before Goldwater proclaims: "Let this generation of Americans set a standard of responsibility that will inspire the world."

Another spot linked the corruption of government officials to moral deterioration. Goldwater exclaims, "Americans everywhere are indignant about the moral decay in Washington," while the narrator calls on voters to "put conscience back in government." A third advertisement asked "What has happened to our America? We build libraries and galleries to hold the world's greatest treasury of art—and we permit the world's greatest collection of smut to be freely available anywhere." A fourth featured Goldwater speaking directly into the camera:

Is moral responsibility out of style? Our papers and our newsreels and yes, our own observations, tell us that immorality surrounds us as never before. We as a nation are not far from the kind of moral decay that has brought on the fall of other nations and people.... [The] philosophy of something for nothing, [the] cult of individual and governmental irresponsibility, is an insidious cancer that will destroy us unless we recognize it and root it out now.

Goldwater made morality the centerpiece of a 30-minute televised address that aired on CBS on October 20, 1964. After citing George Washington's dictum, "'Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports,'" Goldwater said, "The moral fiber of the American people is beset by rot and decay," and pledged "every effort to a reconstruction of reverence and moral strength."

The campaign also produced, but did not air, a television program called "Choice." It focused on the "moral issue," and featured disturbing footage of topless bars, wild beatnik parties, drunken college students, and riots by both whites and blacks. Goldwater declined to use the film in the end, but only, it seems, because he feared that scenes of blacks rioting would introduce unseemly racial overtones into the campaign. But he had no inherent objection to addressing the other issues raised in the show.

Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr.'s History of American Presidential Elections included a scathing contemporaneous account from John Bartlow Martin: "Goldwater's moral strictures soon began to sound preachy; he almost castigated Americans for their wickedness.... Goldwater looked not only like the mad bomber, but the half-crazed moral zealot." Sympathetic observers would characterize his message differently, but what is clear is that Goldwater hardly eschewed moral, social, and cultural themes.

The Rise of the Moral Issue

Nor did he discuss these themes in outline only. He and his party took a socially conservative stand on a number of policy issues. The 1964 GOP platform endorsed a constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme Court's school-prayer decisions and to permit voluntary school prayer. In his CBS televised address, Goldwater asked, "Is this the time in our nation's history for our Federal Government to ban Almighty God from our classrooms?" He answered: "Ours is both a religious and a free people. Over years past we have encountered no difficulty in absorbing that religious character into our state institutions, while at the same time preserving religious liberty and separation of church and state." Goldwater pointed out that his Democratic opponents ignored far more than just school prayer: "you will search in vain for any reference to God or religion in the Democratic platform." The Republican platform called for enactment of legislation "to curb the flow through the mails of obscene materials"; it criticized the Democratic administration and Congress for resisting tuition tax credits; and, not least, it emphasized the rise in crime as a moral issue, not merely a sociological one.

The Conscience of a Conservative devoted an entire chapter to education, anticipating its importance in the eyes of social conservatives. Goldwater paraphrased Dorothy Sayers when he wrote that Americans must "recapture the lost art of learning." He argued that

in our attempt to make education 'fun,' we have neglected the academic disciplines that develop sound minds and are conducive to sound characters.... We have forgotten that the proper function of the school is to transmit the cultural heritage of one generation to the next generation.

As a solution, he advocated a renewed emphasis on basic subjects, within the context of local control of schools.
In The Making of the President 1964, political journalist and election chronicler Theodore White wrote:

Goldwater could offer—and this was his greatest contribution to American politics—only a contagious concern which made people realize that indeed they must begin to think about such things. And this will be his great credit in historical terms: that finally he introduced the condition and quality of American morality and life as a subject of political debateâ€¦. Yet he had no handle to the problem, no program, no solution—except backward to the Bible and the God of the desert.

It's worth reflecting on this paragraph. Writing in 1965, White of course could not have predicted Goldwater's contribution to the long-term rise of conservatism. Nonetheless, this respected center-left analyst held that the Republican nominee's "greatest contribution to American politics" and his "great credit in historical terms" lay not in any impact he might have had on foreign or economic policy, but in the way he forced the "moral issue" onto the national agenda. White also had no difficulty identifying Goldwater's prescription: "the Bible and the God of the desert."

It should come as no surprise, then, that a number of veterans of the Goldwater effort later made names for themselves as leaders of the burgeoning grassroots movement of social conservatives. As Goldwater biographer Lee Edwards has pointed out, "almost all the leaders of the New Right...were drawn into politics because of [Goldwater]," figures like Phyllis Schlafly, Richard Viguerie, Paul Weyrich, and Morton Blackwell. For them, the transition was seamless.

Goldwater's move away from social conservatism came only in the twilight of his Senate career—and more starkly after he had left the Senate in 1987. Throughout the 1970s, he opposed abortion on demand and taxpayer funding of abortions. (He wavered on a constitutional amendment restricting abortion.) In 1980, in the midst of his last and most difficult Senate race, he endorsed the Human Life Amendment. Only in his final term did he adopt a pro-choice position, voting in 1983 against a constitutional amendment that would have reversed Roe v. Wade and returned legislative authority over abortion to the states. In 1984, he reversed his 1964 position by voting against a constitutional amendment to restore voluntary prayer to public schools. As late as 1985 he opposed "gay rights" legislation. Only in 1993, six years after leaving the Senate, did he change his view.

Goldwater's shift was largely a reaction against the leaders of the New Right, for whom his dislike grew stronger as their influence increased. In 1981, Goldwater said of the leader of the Moral Majority, "Every good Christian should kick [Jerry] Falwell in the ass." He also had personal reasons: one daughter and three granddaughters of his had had abortions; and a grandson and a grandniece were homosexual. In 1937, his wife, Peggy, had become a founding member of Planned Parenthood of Arizona, and the couple remained active in the organization throughout Goldwater's Senate career. Though he initially rejected Planned Parenthood's position on abortion, his long association with the group would ultimately make a convert of him. For Goldwater, private considerations like these sometimes trumped abstract philosophy.

Liberty and Morality

So how has the myth developed of the great gulf between "Goldwater conservatism" and Reagan's and Bush's? To begin with, several of the hot-button issues that later mobilized social conservatives en masse were non-issues in 1964, or had barely begun to stir. The '60s counterculture was inchoate, as was radical feminism. The downward spiral of social trends had just begun, as had the Left's crusade to obliterate religion from public life. Key court decisions on abortion, criminal rights, and gay rights lay in the future. Consequently, a distinct mass movement of religious traditionalists—a "Religious Right" with tens of thousands of foot soldiers—did not exist for the Goldwater campaign to incorporate. (To be sure, an intellectual movement of social traditionalists, including Russell Kirk, existed already and backed Goldwater.)

When Goldwater underwent his transformation as the years wore on, liberals rushed to embrace him. This Goldwater became every liberal's favorite conservative—not the historic figure who had condemned moral decay, extolled the religious underpinnings of American society, championed school prayer, inveighed against big government, and helped launch the modern conservative movement. Yet it was the latter Goldwater who ran for president, who galvanized Reagan and pointed the way to a long-term Republican electoral realignment.

Conservatives today need to revive Goldwater's argument in the '60s, and Reagan's in the '80s, that liberty is not only compatible with morality, it depends on it. Limited government cannot long coexist with a collapse of moral order; and an unlimited government is usually the consequence of an amoral society. Sweden, for instance, has both one of the most hedonistic societies in Europe and one of its most smothering welfare states. When in 1964 Goldwater told the graduating class of the Pennsylvania Military College that "it is impossible to maintain freedom and order and justice without religious and moral sanctions," he at once echoed George Washington and Alexis de Tocqueville, presaged Reagan, and issued a clarion call for future generations. </blockquote>

[http://www.claremont.org/publications/crb/id.1237/article_detail.asp]

:*Are you going to make a point or just post an article you found on the internet? You might not have put in any text equating Conservative or Liberal with either American political party, but you did reverse my edits and by doing so it makes it seem like you are equating conservatives with the Republican party. --[[User:Liberalmedia|Liberalmedia]] 21:30, 19 March 2007 (ED

'''[[BNP]]'''

The British National Party is not similar to the Republican Party.The BNP are in fact quite racist in their policies,something which the mainstream Republican party are not.--[[User:RCSENG|RCSENG]] 16:42, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

== Liberal List. ==

Shouldn't the list of things on this page be the reverse of the list on the liberal page? At least as far as US definitions are concerned.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 06:03, 24 March 2007 (EDT)

I've always been partial to [[Steve Jackson]]'s definitions:
:Liberal: Politically 'Left', whatever that means.
:Conservative: Usually mad at the Liberals.
Concise AND accurate!
--[[User:BDobbs|BDobbs]] 17:09, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

== Why was my addition deleted? ==

I'm just curious why my addition concerning the conservative's faith in God was deleted? Seems like that's the biggest defference between Librals and Conservatives, at least with respect to today's culture wars.

*I didn't do it, but I suspect it's because on the face of it, to suggest all Liberals don't believe in God and accept Jesus Christ, is not factual? This isn't a blog space for posting one's own beliefs, even if I personally might agree with your premise. ;-) --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 18:36, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

::There ARE [[Liberal Christians]]. They're the ones who take that communist propaganda in the Book of Matthew (Chapter 25:27-46) as something other than allegory. --[[User:BDobbs|BDobbs]] 17:13, 1 April 2007 (EDT)

== Evolution ==

The article on evolution is locked. Please explain why this is as it violates the idea of a freely editable encyclopedia. The article is also extremely biased and contains very little information on evolution; is mainly the conservative Christan opinion on evolution and irrelevant information. --[[User:Tomt|TomT]] 15:10, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

*I don't know why you posted about Evolution here. However, you are trying to apply standards set by other Wiki's here, and as you can tell from the rules and commandments here, this is indeed the CONSERVApedia. --~ [[User:TK|TerryK]] [[User_talk:TK|MyTalk]] 18:38, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
**I think he meant [[User:Conservative]] (Conservative's extremely creative nickname really makes things confusing sometimes). Well, actually, none of the rules says anything about the need to be Christian-conservative or YECist, unless I really missed a memo. That's what many people complain about: The obvious bias is not acknowledged in the rules. The only possible "reasoning" seems to be the "We do not attempt to be neutral to all points of view. We are neutral to the facts" from the Differences page, with "facts" having a VERY interesting definition ("A fact is what either disses Wikipedia or supports America, the Bible and the YEC position. Anything else is just atheist liberals trying to deny the truth"). --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 18:47, 25 March 2007 (EDT)
***Neutral? Why? Wikipedia started out with the same noble aims - neutrality, fairness, demands for attribution, a fair hearing for all views. Look where dedication to finding 'the facts' got them. The fact is that the internet is disproprortionately liberal, and wikipedia came to reflect that. And if conservapedia impliments exactly the same goals, exactly the same will happen. To be a conservative encyclopedia, it must be willing to recognise that only by giving conservatives an 'unfair' advantage can real fairness be achieved - otherwise the numerical advantage of liberals will just allow them to turn it into a second wikipedia. - BornAgainBrit
**And no, please don't move this to Conservative's Talk page. He locked it again. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 18:48, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

== Origins and conservative presidents ==

<s>If conservatism didn't arise until the 19th century, how was George Washington a conservative President? [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)</s> Sorry, someone already asked this. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 03:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

== Addition to definition==
Conservatism/Conservatives tend to believe in the rights of individuals over 'group' rights
Conservatives tend to believe that individuals should, to the greatest extent possible, be responsible for themselves & for their own success
Conservatives tend to believe that the best way to help people is through private means, rather than through government programs. right wing2

*"Conservatives tend to believe in the rights of individuals over 'group' rights..." Which is why conservatives in America are fighting so strongly for the rights of individuals to engage in any private, consensual sexual act they choose, right?

==Lincoln a Conservative?==
How was Lincoln a conservative? He brought about radical economic and social change in the name of human rights. He was against the institution of slavery that was a tradition in the South. He was also a Republican. At that time the Republican party was liberal.--[[User:ResistanceFighter|ResistanceFighter]] 14:11, 19 May 2007 (EDT)
:I agree with RestanceFighter. Lincoln was definitely not conservative. He was more of progressive because he brought change into America. It seems like the people who wrote this article think Republicans were the same as conservatives in the 19th century. --[[User:Penguin|Penguin]] 22:34, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

*You cannot in any intellectual way, or any logical way, apply our modern ideas of what Liberal, Progressive or Conservative is, and compare them retroactively to the past. --[[User:TK|Sysop-TK]] [[User_talk:TK|/MyTalk]] 22:58, 18 June 2007 (EDT)
:We are not applying our modern ideas of conservative and applying them to Lincoln. You make it sound like definitions change over a hundred years. Which if that were it would make it impossible to read old texts and understand what the author was talking about.--[[User:Penguin|Penguin]] 23:06, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

I strongly disagree that Lincoln was a conservative. Restistance Fighter is right, he did break with the long held tradition of slavery. Also, he suspended the writ of habeas corpus during the Civil War, taking a position of power not given to the president by the Constitution. This, in my opinion, is a very liberal act. Most historians have agreed that Lincoln was a conservative in the beginning, with the hope that he could keep the United States together under one federal government. However, his actions during the presdideny certainly do not match conservative policy. {{unsigned|Getbackloretta66}}

== Andrew Jackson ==

If you are going to put Polk on the list of conservative presidents, then why don't you put Andrew Jackson on there too? Polk was a Jacksonian Democrat and had the same views as Andrew Jackson.--[[User:Penguin|Penguin]] 22:41, 18 June 2007 (EDT)

== Conservative communists?? ==

It would be good to add in further discussion of the term "conservative" in the article. When discussing the politics of countries ruled by a Communist Party, such as China, the word "conservative" is used to refer to Communist Party members, especially officials who hold to traditional communist values such as central planning, state ownership of the economy, stronger censorship of the media and stronger repression of dissidents and practitioners of religion, especially Christians. The term "liberal" used when discussing these matters refers to those Communist Party members who favour economic reform, with more private involvement in the economy, more freedom of expression and movement towards a more liberal political regime, perhaps even towards a democratic system. I believe the word also has further definitions which are worth discussing, and then some further paragraphs could be added to the article to make it more complete. {{Unsigned|Luojie}}
:''ROFLMAO !!!'' [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 16:16, 1 August 2007 (EDT)
It's true!! Check out the China pages of the South China Morning Post. BTW, there are also conservative and liberal Muslims. The former will adhere more closely to traditional Islam and are more likely to support terrorism than the liberal Muslims who want to live a more Western lifestyle, and so interpret Islam to fit their material and other desires.
:Yes, I recall the "Kremlin conservatives" at the end of the Soviet era, the reactionaries that wanted to preserve Communism. Very reminiscent of the reactionaries in the U.S. Democratic party who refuse to reform Social Security. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 12:12, 2 August 2007 (EDT)
As Ma Lik, the chairman of the pro-Beijing Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong has just passed away, so the media (e.g. the South China Morning Post) brought up the word conservative as it is used in the Hong Kong political context. Here in HK, conservative means pro-Beijing, not wanting to introduce universal suffrage at an early date and in favour of keeping functional constituencies (legislative seats reserved for special interest groups such as tycoons). Pro-democracy groups which want universal suffrage as soon as possible and which place importance on human rights are considered "liberal", even though they may fit the definition of conservative when it comes to social matters such as gambling and small government[[User:Luojie|Luojie]] 09:30, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

*It never ceases to amaze me the different colloquialisms we run into throughout the world. I am now on a personal campaign to fight the entire establishment to stop applying the term "Communist" to China, since there is not much left that could be properly labeled communistic in their economic system. They are really just a despotic regime, a rump tyrannical establishment group of old men, who replaced the Cult of Personality that was Mao. The Tyrants now running China will go to any lengths to avoid admitting Communism was an abject failure there, as it was every other place it was imposed. In point of fact, Communism was always imposed, never voted for and never really welcomed by the masses it pretended to serve. Nowadays wherever we find it, it is usually an Oligarchy in disguise. --[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]][[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]] 14:58, 12 August 2007 (EDT)

== Bulleted list? ==

Should the list of conservative people be a bulleted list? It looks a bit weird with just a name on each line and nothing else. [[User:SigmaEpsilon|SigmaEpsilon]] 23:42, 17 August 2007 (EDT)

Michelle Malkin

2007-08-18T03:39:36Z

SigmaEpsilon: condense one-liners, add stub tag

{{stub}}

[[Image:Mm7.jpg|right|thumb|Michelle Malkin]]
'''Michelle Malkin''' (born 1970) is an [[United States|American]] [[conservative]] [[pundit]] and [[journalist]].

== Beliefs ==

Michelle has an entire section on articles against [[illegal immigration|illegal immigrant]] amnesty.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/category/immigration/amnesty/ Amnesty section] on MichelleMalkin.com</ref> Michelle has stated that she wants the U.S. to clear the legal immigrant backlogs ''first'', instead of trying to legalize illegals.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/17/memo-to-washington-clear-the-damn-backlogs-first/ Memo to Washington: Clear the damn backlogs first], MichelleMalkin.com, June 17, 2007</ref> After the [[United States]] built a border fence with [[Mexico]] on the wrong side, Michelle wrote that she wonders if we can "do anything right on [[border security]]." Her solution is "Border security now. Not later."<ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/26/border-follies-us-sorry-for-building-barrier-that-encroaches-on-mexico/ Border follies: U.S. sorry for building barrier that encroaches on Mexico], MichelleMalkin.com, June 26, 2007 </ref>

Michelle highlighted a group of Ex-Muslims hoping to change the terms of debate about [[Islam]] in [[Europe]]. <ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/20/ex-muslims-stand-up-in-britain/ Ex-Muslims stand up in Britain]</ref>

Michelle says that [[Jesse Jackson]] should be trying to stop black [[gangs]], instead of protesting gun shops. <ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/24/the-desperate-jesse-jackson/ The desperate Jesse Jackson], MichelleMalkin.com, June 24, 2007</ref>

==Archives==
These are the archive categories for Michelle's articles:

*'''[[Abortion]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/abortion/
*'''[[Animal rights]]''' wackos http://michellemalkin.com/category/animal-rights/
*'''[[BBC]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/bbc/
*'''[[Berkeley]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/berkeley/
*'''[[Blogosphere]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/blogosphere/
*'''[[Cameron Diaz]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cameron-diaz/
*'''[[Cronyism]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cronyism/
*'''[[Cuba]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cuba/
*'''[[Liberal hypocrisy|Double standards]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/double-standards/
*'''[[Duke University|Duke]] [[lacrosse]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/duke-lacrosse/
*'''[[Dunkin Donuts]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/dunkin-donuts/
*'''[[Education]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/education/
*'''End of life issues''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/end-of-life-issues/
*'''[[Environmentalist|Enviro-nitwits]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/enviro-nitwits/
*'''[[Fairness Doctrine]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/fairness-doctrine/
*'''[[Feminist Nonsense]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/feminist-nonsense/
*'''[[Fun]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/fun/
*'''[[Guns]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/guns/
*'''[[Haditha]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/haditha/
*'''[[Haleigh Poutre]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/haleigh-poutre/
*'''[[Health care]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/health-care/
*'''[[Hollyweird]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/hollyweird/

==References==
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://michellemalkin.com/ Michelle Malkin's blog]
*[http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/archive.shtml Malkin's Townhall.com column archive]
*[http://hotair.com/ Michelle Malkin's video blog]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Malkin, Michelle}}
[[category:Journalists]]

Michelle Malkin

2007-08-18T03:34:12Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* Amnesty */ fix ref, fix redlink to point to correct page

[[Image:Mm7.jpg|right|thumb|Michelle Malkin]]
'''Michelle Malkin''' (born 1970) is an [[United States|American]] [[conservative]] [[pundit]] and [[journalist]].

== Amnesty ==

Michelle has an entire section on articles against [[illegal immigration|illegal immigrant]] amnesty.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/category/immigration/amnesty/ Amnesty section] on MichelleMalkin.com</ref>

Michelle wants the U.S. to clear the legal immigrant backlogs ''first'', instead of trying to legalize illegals.<ref>[http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/17/memo-to-washington-clear-the-damn-backlogs-first/ Memo to Washington: Clear the damn backlogs first], MichelleMalkin.com, June 17, 2007 </ref>

After the [[United States]] built a border fence with [[Mexico]] on the wrong side, Michelle wonders if we can "do anything right on [[border security]]." Her solution is "Border security now. Not later."<ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/26/border-follies-us-sorry-for-building-barrier-that-encroaches-on-mexico/ Border follies: U.S. sorry for building barrier that encroaches on Mexico], MichelleMalkin.com, June 26, 2007 </ref>

==Ex-Muslims==
[[Michelle Malkin|Michelle]] highlights a group of Ex-Muslims hoping to change the terms of debate about [[Islam]] in [[Europe]]. <ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/20/ex-muslims-stand-up-in-britain/ Ex-Muslims stand up in Britain]</ref>

==[[Gun control]]==

Michelle says [[Jesse Jackson]] should be trying to stop black [[gangs]], instead of protesting gun shops. <ref> [http://michellemalkin.com/2007/06/24/the-desperate-jesse-jackson/ The desperate Jesse Jackson], MichelleMalkin.com, June 24, 2007</ref>

==Archives==
These are the archive categories for Michelle's articles:

*'''[[Abortion]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/abortion/
*'''[[Animal rights]]''' wackos http://michellemalkin.com/category/animal-rights/
*'''[[BBC]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/bbc/
*'''[[Berkeley]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/berkeley/
*'''[[Blogosphere]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/blogosphere/
*'''[[Cameron Diaz]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cameron-diaz/
*'''[[Cronyism]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cronyism/
*'''[[Cuba]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/cuba/
*'''[[Liberal hypocrisy|Double standards]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/double-standards/
*'''[[Duke University|Duke]] [[lacrosse]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/duke-lacrosse/
*'''[[Dunkin Donuts]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/dunkin-donuts/
*'''[[Education]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/education/
*'''End of life issues''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/end-of-life-issues/
*'''[[Environmentalist|Enviro-nitwits]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/enviro-nitwits/
*'''[[Fairness Doctrine]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/fairness-doctrine/
*'''[[Feminist Nonsense]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/feminist-nonsense/
*'''[[Fun]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/fun/
*'''[[Guns]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/guns/
*'''[[Haditha]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/haditha/
*'''[[Haleigh Poutre]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/haleigh-poutre/
*'''[[Health care]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/health-care/
*'''[[Hollyweird]]''' http://michellemalkin.com/category/hollyweird/

==References==
<references/>

==External Links==
*[http://michellemalkin.com/ Michelle Malkin's blog]
*[http://www.townhall.com/columnists/michellemalkin/archive.shtml Malkin's Townhall.com column archive]
*[http://hotair.com/ Michelle Malkin's video blog]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Malkin, Michelle}}
[[category:Journalists]]

User talk:CPanel

2007-08-16T16:21:57Z

SigmaEpsilon: Minor suggestion for several locked articles

User talk:CPanel

2007-08-16T16:15:52Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* Adolf */ closing "" tag

Iowa Straw Poll

2007-08-12T02:51:57Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* 2007 Iowa Straw Poll */ commas in table

The '''Ames Straw Poll''', known more widely as the '''Iowa Straw Poll''', is the most prominent [[Republican]] presidential [[straw poll]]. The Straw Poll, sponsored by the Iowa GOP, is held at [[Iowa State University]] the August before any Republican presidential primary. Although the straw poll is a non-binding political activity, it has been used as a measuring stick of the viability of candidates presidential bid. The Ames Straw Poll, which charges $35 for each admission, also acts as a fund raising event for the Iowa Republican party. Voting is open to all party affiliations<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=3460114&page=1</ref>. Along with the straw poll, attendants are invited to somewhat of a carnival; including barbecues, inflatable playground equipment for kids, music, and supporters rallying for their candidates<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/08/live_from_the_s.html</ref>.

Because of the significance of the straw poll, primary candidates have spent large sums of money purchasing pre-paid ballots for supporters. In 2004, [[Steve Forbes]] and [[George W. Bush]] each spent over $2 million on tickets and activities for the Iowa Straw Poll<ref>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=980DE6D91039F936A2575BC0A96F958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print</ref>. The Iowa Straw Poll has also been a hive for media, with over 250 news organizations on hand during the 1999 straw poll.

The Iowa Straw Poll has acted as a means of narrowing down Republican primary contestants. Lower tier candidates are forced to place high in the straw poll in order to keep up funding from supporters. In 1999, [[Lamar Alexander]] ended his primary campaign just two days after the Iowa Straw Poll. In October of the same year, Elizabeth Dole also cut short her campaign after not living up to her supporters expectations in the Iowa Straw Poll<ref>http://www.iowagop.net/straw.poll.asp</ref>.

The 2007 Iowa Straw Poll was won by former Massachusetts' Governor [[Mitt Romney]]. Conservative [[Mike Huckabee]], the former [[Arkansas]] governor, placed second in the straw poll of over fourteen thousand Iowa voters.

==2007 Iowa Straw Poll==
[[Image:2007IowaStrawPollLogo.jpg‎ |thumb|240px|The Official logo of the 2007 Iowa Straw Poll]]
The 2007 Iowa straw poll was on held August 11th and consisted of Republican primary candidates [[Mitt Romney]], [[Mike Huckabee]], [[Tom Tancredo]], [[John Cox]], [[Ron Paul]], [[Duncan Hunter]], [[Tommy Thompson]] and [[Sam Brownback]]<ref>http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070625/NEWS/70625033/1001</ref>. Presidential primary candidates [[John McCain]] and [[Rudy Giuliani]] decided not to participate in the straw poll<ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2007-06-06-iowa-straw-poll_N.htm</ref>, allegedly because of time and resources constraints. Organizers expected a crowd of 40,000 Iowa Republicans at the 2007 straw poll, but campaign estimates showed a sharp decline from the 1999 straw poll with just 14,000 Iowans casting straw ballots, compared to 23,500 voters in the 1999 straw poll<ref>http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/</ref>. Conservative talk show host [[Laura Ingraham]] served as Master of Ceremonies. <ref>http://www.iowagop.net/downloads/Straw.Poll.Info.pdf</ref>

Some Republican primary candidates stated that they would not remain in the primary race unless they had a good showing at the straw poll. Mike Huckabee, who finished second, before stated he would reconsider his race if he did not get in the top half of the straw poll finishers. Tommy Thompson stated he would step down from the race if he did not finish in the top two straw poll spots, a position he did not come close too; finishing sixth.
The three House members competing, Representatives Duncan Hunter of California, Ron Paul of Texas and Tom Tancredo of Colorado, vowed to stay in the race regardless of their placement in the straw poll<ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ap55FE7Ol9O8&refer=us</ref>.

Mitt Romney, who held a significant lead in the Iowa polls, came into the straw poll with a advantage over the other straw poll candidates<ref>http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2007/08/group_attacks_r.html</ref>. Because McCain and Giuliani did not attend the straw poll, Romney was predicted to easily win. In an effort to gain support from Iowa conservatives, Sam Brownback campaigned heavily against Romney's past stance on [[abortion]] and alleged that fellow Republican candidate, [[Tom Tancredo]], gave money to a "founder of a Planned Parenthood network" in a negative advertisement days before the straw poll<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/video/2007/07/26/VI2007072601105.html</ref><ref>http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/07/26/brownbacks_robocallshit_romney.html</ref>.

The Tancredo campaign stated that they do not share values with all their funders and that Tancredo's voting record shows he is clearly pro-life. Former [[Arkansas]] Governor, Mike Huckabee, stated that while he believed Romney's current beliefs on abortion, electing Romney would lead to accusations of a "flip-flop", which he says could lead to a Republican loss in the presidential race<ref>http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/08/posttalk_huckabees_tough_talk.html</ref>.

Tancredo has attacked fellow candidates Romney, Brownback, and Huckabee on the issue of immigration. Former governor Mike Huckabee stated that Tancredo's ad claiming Huckabee held a pro-amnesty position was "blatantly dishonest", and that Tancredo's campaign either did sloppy research or deliberately mischaracterized his position<ref>http://www.rightwingwatch.org/individuals/john_tanton/index.html</ref>. Tancredo has used strong opposition to Illegal immigration as a central position of his campaign in Iowa, officially calling it “The Army Against Amnesty.”<ref>http://race42008.com/category/tom-tancredo/</ref> He stated in a speech during the Iowa Straw Poll, "This is our culture. Fight for it!" This is our nation. Take it back." <ref>http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/</ref>

Most candidates have offered free straw poll tickets to supporters, with exception of Duncan Hunter. The Tancredo, Romney and Brownback campaigns used numerous buses to get supporters to the straw poll.<ref>http://race42008.com/category/tom-tancredo/</ref>

After an hour of delay due to a voting machine malfunction, which led to the recount of over 1,500 ballots,<ref>http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/08/ames_a_partial_recount_confirm.php</ref> Mitt Romney won the 2007 Ames straw poll, receiving 4516 votes, or 31%. Former conservative governor [[Mike Huckabee]], who's poll numbers had been steadily rising around the nation, finished second with 2587 votes at 18.1%<ref>http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/</ref>. Huckabee's second place finish was somewhat of a surprise to political analyst because of his lack of transportation to the straw poll and late start in Iowa.

{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Name
! Votes
! Percentage
|-
|[[Mitt Romney]]
|4,516
|31%.
|-
|[[Mike Huckabee]]
|2,587
|18.1%
|-
|[[Sam Brownback]]
|2,192
|15.3%
|-
|[[Tom Tancredo]]
|1,961
|13.7%
|-
|[[Ron Paul]]
|1,305
|9%
|-
|[[Tommy Thompson]]
|1,009
|7.3%
|-
|}

==Winners==
{| class="wikitable"
|-
! Year
! Name
! Result
|
|-
|2007
|Mitt Romney
|
|-
|2000
| [[George W. Bush]]
| Won the [[Republican]] primary, and went on to became [[President of the United States]].
|-
|1995
|[[Pat Robertson]]
|Lost Republican primary.
|-
|1995
|[[Bob Dole]] and [[Phil Gramm]] (tie)
|Bob Dole went on to win the Republican primary after tying for first place in the [[Iowa Caucus]].
|-
| 1979
| [[George H.W. Bush]]
| Lost to [[Ronald Reagan]] in Republican primary and becomes vice president candidate
|-
|}

==External Links==
*[http://www.iowagop.net/straw.poll.asp Iowa Straw Poll Official Site]
*[http://www.iowagop.net/downloads/Straw.Poll.Info.pdf Schedule and Information Regarding the 2007 Straw Poll]
==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Politics]]

Conservapedia:Critical Thinking in Math

2007-08-05T22:09:33Z

SigmaEpsilon: fix number

"Critical Thinking in Math" is an experimental course with four independent purposes in mind:

*sharpen the analytical skills of students and improve their math [[College Board]] scores

*awaken an interest in [[mathematics]] by students who did not realize they had extraordinary aptitude for math, the future [[Bernhard Riemann]]s

*encourage adults to keep their mind sharp through mathematics, and fend off mental decline

*help parents who would like to teach math to their [[homeschooled]] children

The experiment is to use only fundamental or elementary techniques to accomplish the above results. No tools beyond about 9th grade math is required, and motivated students younger than 9th grade will not have difficulty with the concepts.

This course seeks the contributions of both teachers and students to make it is effective as possible. It will be begin in September. Possible topics include:

*a comparative look at different techniques of proof

*major problems that remain unsolved using elementary techniques

*a look at the history of the development of math

*an analysis of what skills [[College Board]] exams test, and how to improve those skills

Please feel free to add other topics and suggestions, and add your name below as a teacher or student interested in this field:

--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 16:08, 5 August 2007 (EDT)
[[category:mathematics]]

Hannity & Colmes

2007-07-30T20:14:11Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* See Also */ formatting in list

'''Hannity and Colmes''' is a talk show/pundit program on [[Fox News|Fox News Channel]]. The program is a left/right debate style program. It features [[Sean Hannity]] on the right, and [[Alan Colmes]] on the left. This show is similar to [[CNN]]'s, now cancelled, [[Crossfire]]. Hannity and Colmes has featured prominent guests such as former Clinton Administration Advisor [[Dick Morris]], New Mexico Governor [[Bill Richardson]], former New York City Mayor [[Rudy Giuliani]], New York Senator [[Charles Schumer]], Rev. Al Sharpton, DNC Chairman Howard Dean and former New York City Mayor [[Ed Koch]].

== References ==

[http://www.foxnews.com/hannityandcolmes/index.html Hannity and Colmes at FoxNews.com]

===See Also===
*[[Sean Hannity]]
*[[Alan Colmes]]
*[[Fox News]]

[[category:conservative media]]
[[category:television shows]]

Edinburgh

2007-07-30T19:58:24Z

SigmaEpsilon: /* Sport */ typo

'''Edinburgh''' is the current capital of [[Scotland]]. There is controversy over the origins of the name Edinburgh, which may derive from King Edwin of Northumbria (Edwins-burgh, burgh being the Northumbrian and later [[Scots]] word for fort or town) or from the earlier Gaelic 'Dún Eideann' (Fort of Edwin).

Edinburgh has a population of around half a million souls. It is the home of the Scottish Parliament at [[Holyrood]], the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and the world's largest annual arts festival, the [[Edinburgh International Festival]].

== The City and Its People ==

The city is also a centre of banking, commerce, education, and food processing. Natives of Edinburgh are called 'Edinburgers' but are popularly known as 'Fuds' to fellow Scots.

== Education ==

There are three universities in Edinburgh - the University of Edinburgh (1583), Heriot Watt University (1965) and Napier University (1992). The city also has many notable private schools including Fettes College (the ''alma mater'' of [[Tony Blair]]), George Watson's College, George Heriot Academy, Loreto College and the Marcia Blaine School for Girls.

== Sport ==

Edinburgh has two football clubs; Hibernian FC (nickname: the Hibees) and Heart of Midlothian FC (nickname: the Jambos). Both play in the Scottish Premier League. The famous author Sir [[Walter Scott]] wrote a novel ''The Heart of Midlothian'' based around the early days of the club and its founder Vladimir Romanov, an exile from Tsarist [[Russia]] and friend of the author [[Alexander Pushkin]].

== Culture ==

[[Paganism]] is still practiced in Edinburgh. Every 30th April sees the Pagan Beltane Fire Festival conducted on Calton Hill near Edinburgh City Centre.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6610507.stm</ref>

== Famous natives of Edinburgh ==

*[[Sean Connery]] (actor)
*Irvine Welsh (author)
*Les McKeown (classical musician)
*[[James Connolly]] (trade unionist and Irish political agitator)
*Tam Paton (child psychologist)
*John Leslie (television presenter)
*[[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle]] (author)
*[[Robert Louis Stevenson]] (author)
*Ian Rankin (author)
*[[Walter Scott]] (author)
*James Clerk Maxwell (physicist)
*[[James Hutton]] (geologist)
*John Napier (mathematician)
*[[David Hume]] (philosopher)
*[[Adam Smith]] (philosopher and economist)
*[[Tony Blair]] (politician and entertainer)
*[[Malcolm Rifkind]] (politician)

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Scottish Towns and Cities]]

Edinburgh

2007-07-30T19:58:04Z

SigmaEpsilon: fix headings

'''Edinburgh''' is the current capital of [[Scotland]]. There is controversy over the origins of the name Edinburgh, which may derive from King Edwin of Northumbria (Edwins-burgh, burgh being the Northumbrian and later [[Scots]] word for fort or town) or from the earlier Gaelic 'Dún Eideann' (Fort of Edwin).

Edinburgh has a population of around half a million souls. It is the home of the Scottish Parliament at [[Holyrood]], the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, and the world's largest annual arts festival, the [[Edinburgh International Festival]].

== The City and Its People ==

The city is also a centre of banking, commerce, education, and food processing. Natives of Edinburgh are called 'Edinburgers' but are popularly known as 'Fuds' to fellow Scots.

== Education ==

There are three universities in Edinburgh - the University of Edinburgh (1583), Heriot Watt University (1965) and Napier University (1992). The city also has many notable private schools including Fettes College (the ''alma mater'' of [[Tony Blair]]), George Watson's College, George Heriot Academy, Loreto College and the Marcia Blaine School for Girls.

== Sport ===

Edinburgh has two football clubs; Hibernian FC (nickname: the Hibees) and Heart of Midlothian FC (nickname: the Jambos). Both play in the Scottish Premier League. The famous author Sir [[Walter Scott]] wrote a novel ''The Heart of Midlothian'' based around the early days of the club and its founder Vladimir Romanov, an exile from Tsarist [[Russia]] and friend of the author [[Alexander Pushkin]].

== Culture ==

[[Paganism]] is still practiced in Edinburgh. Every 30th April sees the Pagan Beltane Fire Festival conducted on Calton Hill near Edinburgh City Centre.<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/6610507.stm</ref>

== Famous natives of Edinburgh ==

*[[Sean Connery]] (actor)
*Irvine Welsh (author)
*Les McKeown (classical musician)
*[[James Connolly]] (trade unionist and Irish political agitator)
*Tam Paton (child psychologist)
*John Leslie (television presenter)
*[[Sir Arthur Conan Doyle]] (author)
*[[Robert Louis Stevenson]] (author)
*Ian Rankin (author)
*[[Walter Scott]] (author)
*James Clerk Maxwell (physicist)
*[[James Hutton]] (geologist)
*John Napier (mathematician)
*[[David Hume]] (philosopher)
*[[Adam Smith]] (philosopher and economist)
*[[Tony Blair]] (politician and entertainer)
*[[Malcolm Rifkind]] (politician)

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Scottish Towns and Cities]]

T.S. Eliot

2007-07-30T19:57:08Z

SigmaEpsilon: add section heading: Excerpts

'''Thomas Stearns Eliot''' (1888-1965) was a poet, playwright, and literary critic. He was a dominant force in the English and American literary scene during the middle third of the twentieth century. Some of his works include the "Waste Land" <ref>http://www.artofeurope.com/eliot/eli3.htm</ref> in 1922, and the "Journey of the Magi" in 1927. He studied at Oxford, Paris, and Harvard. Eventually, he won the Nobel Prize for literature.

T. S. Eliot was born and grew up in St. Louis, [[Missouri]], along the Mississippi River. But in adulthood he moved to England. In 1927 he renounced his American citizenship, became a British subject, and converted to Anglicanism. He described himself as "classicist in literature, royalist in politics, and Anglo-Catholic in religion." Eliot's religious views are most notably contained in the poem ''Ash Wednesday'', which he wrote in 1927 after his conversion, and particularly in the ''Four Quartets''. These were four related poems published separately between 1935 and 1942, and republished in one volume in 1943. Their titles are ''Burnt Norton'', <ref>http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/norton.html> ''East Coker'' <ref>http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/coker.html</ref>, ''The Dry Salvages'' <ref>http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/salvages.html</ref>, and ''Little Gidding'' <ref>http://www.tristan.icom43.net/quartets/gidding.html</ref>.

Eliot considered Four Quartets to be his masterpiece. It draws upon his study, over three decades, of mysticism and philosophy. Christian imagery and symbolism in the poems is abundant

Notable plays include ''The Cocktail Party,'' which concerns a group of contemporary people talking about their marital and other problems, and who are counselled by a mysterious character, ostensibly a psychiatrist; and ''Murder in the Cathedral,'' about the death of [[Thomas Becket]].

== Excerpts ==

Some famous lines from T. S. Eliot that are often alluded to or quoted include:

  Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach? 
  I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach 
  I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each. 
  I do not think that they will sing to me. 
::(from "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock" <ref>http://www.artofeurope.com/eliot/eli1.htm</ref>)

  This is the way the world ends 
  Not with a bang but a whimper. 
::(from "The Hollow Men"<ref>http://www.artofeurope.com/eliot/eli2.htm</ref>)

  April is the cruellest month, breeding 
  Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing 
  Memory and desire, stirring 
  Dull roots with spring rain. 
::(from "The Waste Land"<ref>http://www.artofeurope.com/eliot/eli3.htm</ref>)

==References==

<references/>

==External links==
*[http://www.bartleby.com/198/1.html The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock]
*[http://www.bartleby.com/201/1.html The Waste Land]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Eliot, Thomas Stearns}}
[[Category:Nobel laureates in Literature]]
[[category:Poets]]

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

2007-07-30T19:54:00Z

SigmaEpsilon: minor formatting

'''Sudden Infant Death Syndrome''' (abbreviated '''SIDS''') is he sudden and unexpected death of a healthy infant under one year of age. A diagnosis of SIDS is made when an autopsy cannot determine another cause of death. The cause of SIDS is unknown. Also known as "crib" or "cot" death.<ref>[http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/about/terms/glossary.htm#s CDC Glossary: "S"]</ref>

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Medicine]]

Force

2007-07-30T19:50:51Z

SigmaEpsilon: cleanup

'''Force''' is defined as rate of change of [[momentum]] of a body ('''F''' = dp/dt). The [[International System of Units|SI]] unit of force is the [[newton]] and the [[US customary system]] unit is the pound.

The momentum of an object is given by ''p = m v''. For non-[[Theory of Relativity|relativistic]] speeds, ''F = m a''.<ref>Marcelo Alonso and Edward J. Finn, ''Fundamental University Physics'', Addison-Wesley.</ref> In these expressions, ''F'' stands for the total vector sum of all forces, ''m'' for the mass of the object, ''a'' for its [[acceleration]] expressed as a vector, ''p'' stands for momentum vector and ''v'' for velocity vector.

There are four known fundamental types of forces occurring in nature<ref>Lewis H. Ryder, ''Quantum Field Theory'', 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (UK), 1996</ref>:

;[[Electromagnetism|Electromagnetic]] force
:The force that acts on objects with [[electric charge]].
;[[Gravitation]]al force
:The force that attracts any two objects with [[mass]].
;Strong force
:The force that keeps [[atom]]ic [[nucleus|nuclei]] together.
;Weak force
:This force is involved in ''beta decay'', in which a [[neutron]] in an atomic nucleus is changed to a [[proton]], emitting an [[electron]] and a [[neutrino]].

It should be noted that the latter two forces have an extremely short range (on the order of femtometers), and that a classical (Newtonian or relativistic) description of these forces is not possible. They can only be described using [[quantum field theory]], a relativistic version of [[quantum mechanics]].

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Physics]]
[[Category:Mechanics]]

User:SigmaEpsilon/monobook.js

2007-07-28T19:19:31Z

SigmaEpsilon: create

// install [[User:Cacycle/wikEd]] in-browser text editor
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="'
+ 'http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Cacycle/wikEd.js'
+ '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');
var wikEdLoadRegExTypoFix = true;

// jncsp-start The section below (up to jncsp-end) is maintained by [[Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/User-script_manager]]
// jncsp-config setupPopups editTop addSinceTab addLastDiff addUserTabs addPurgeTab

if (location.href == "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_User_scripts/User-script_manager")
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w' +
'/index.php?title=User:Jitse_Niesen/Client-side_preferences/Main.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script>');

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/addLink]], revision 73544644

//A helper function to add a button to one of the toolbars in the interface.
//An improved(I hope) version of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Add LI link|addlilink]].
//[[User:JesseW/sig|JesseW, the juggling janitor]] 05:33, 8 November *2005 (UTC)

function addLink(where, url, name, id, title, key, after){
//* where is the id of the toolbar where the button should be added;
// i.e. one of "p-cactions", "p-personal", "p-navigation", or "p-tb".
//
//* url is the URL which will be called when the button is clicked.
// javascript: urls can be used to do more complex things.
//
//* name is what will appear as the name of the button.
//
//* id is the id of the button; it's best to define one.
// Use a prefix to make sure its unique. Optional.
//
//* title is the tooltip title that gives a longer description
// of the button; if you define a accesskey, mention it here. Optional.
//
//* key is the char you want for the accesskey. Optional.
//
//* after is the id of the button you want to follow this one. Optional.
//
var na = document.createElement('a');
na.href = url;
na.appendChild(document.createTextNode(name));
var li = document.createElement('li');
if(id) li.id = id;
li.appendChild(na);
var tabs = document.getElementById(where).getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
if(after) {
tabs.insertBefore(li,document.getElementById(after));
} else {
tabs.appendChild(li);
}
if(id) {
if(key && title) { ta[id] = [key, title]; }
else if(key) { ta[id] = [key, '']; }
else if(title) { ta[id] = ['', title];}
}
// re-render the title and accesskeys from existing code in wikibits.js
akeytt();
return li;
}

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Add_purge_to_tabs]], revision 76509603

// addPurge
addOnloadHook( function (){
var x = document.getElementById('ca-history');
if(!x) return;
if(x.children) x = x.children[0].href;
else x = x.childNodes[0].href;
addLink("p-cactions", x.replace(/=history/, "=purge"), 'purge', 'ca-purge', 'Purge the internal cache for this page', 0);
});

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Add_LI_link]], revision 73544143

function addlilink(tabs, url, name, id, title, key){
var na = document.createElement('a');
na.href = url;
na.appendChild(document.createTextNode(name));
var li = document.createElement('li');
if(id) li.id = id;
li.appendChild(na);
tabs.appendChild(li);
if(id)
{
if(key && title)
{
ta[id] = [key, title];
}
else if(key)
{
ta[id] = [key, ''];
}
else if(title)
{
ta[id] = ['', title];
}
}
// re-render the title and accesskeys from existing code in wikibits.js
akeytt();
return li;
}

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Add_tab]], revision 73544604

function addTab(url, name, id, title, key){
var tabs = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
return addlilink(tabs, url, name, id, title, key)
};

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/User_tabs]], revision 73795341

//Please leave the following line
//[[user:Where/usertabs]]

addOnloadHook(function() {
if (document.title.search("/") != -1 || document.title.search("- History -") != -1) { //no subpages or history
return;
}
if (document.title.indexOf("User:") == 0 || document.title.indexOf("User talk:") == 0) {
username_a = document.URL.match(/:.*:(.*)/);
username=username_a[1];
addTab("http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/" + username, "contrib", "ca-contrib", "contribs", "");
addTab("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=move&user=" + username, "page moves", "ca-pagemoves", "page moves", "");
addTab("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=" + username, "block log", "ca-blog", "blog", "");
addTab("http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate?username=" + username + "&site=en.wikipedia.org", "edit count", "ca-kate", "Show edit count for this user", "");
}
});

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Show_last_diff]], revision 67477415

//From http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JesseW/monobook.js&oldid=20755510

// addLastDiff
addOnloadHook(function () {
z=document.getElementById("content").childNodes;
for (var n=0;n<z.length;n++) {
if (z[n].className=="firstHeading") {
var pname=z[n].textContent ? z[n].textContent : z[n].innerText;
}
}
var l=addTab("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=" + pname + "&diff=cur&oldid=prev", 'last', '');
l.lastChild.title="Show most recent diff";
});

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Changes_since_I_last_edited]], revision 60911506

//From http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:JesseW/monobook.js&oldid=20755510
function addSinceTab() {
var tabs = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
if (window.location.href.indexOf("&action=history&gotosince=true")!=-1) {
do_since_I_last_edited()
}
else if (!/wiki\/Special:|w\/index.php?title=Special:/.test(window.location.href)) {
var thetitle=document.title.slice(0, String(document.title).indexOf(" - "));
var l=addlilink(tabs, "/w/index.php?title="+thetitle+"&action=history&gotosince=true", 'Changes since I last edited', '');
l.lastChild.title="Changes since I last edited";
}
}
function do_since_I_last_edited() {
var csub=document.getElementById("contentSub");
var msg=document.createElement("p");
msg.appendChild(document.createTextNode
("Parsing history... please wait..."));
msg.className="error";
csub.insertBefore(msg, csub.firstChild)

var username=document.getElementById("pt-userpage").textContent;
var hists=document.getElementById("pagehistory").getElementsByTagName('li');
for (n=0;n<hists.length;n++) {
if (hists[n].getElementsByTagName("span")[0].getElementsByTagName('a')[0].textContent==username) {
document.location=hists[n].childNodes[1].href;
return;
}
}

msg.replaceChild(document.createTextNode
("You have not edited this page! (recently)"),
msg.firstChild);
}

addOnloadHook(addSinceTab);

// From [[Wikipedia:WikiProject User_scripts/Scripts/Edit_Top]], revision 87854342

// This will add an [edit] link at the top of all pages except preview pages and the main page
// by User:Pile0nades

// Add an [edit] link to pages
addOnloadHook(function () {
// if this is preview page or generated page, stop
if(document.getElementById("wikiPreview") || window.location.href.indexOf("/wiki/Special:") != -1) return;

// if this is a revision history, stop
if(document.getElementById("histlegend ") || window.location.href.indexOf("/wiki/Special:") != -1) return;

// if this is a diff page, stop
if(document.getElementById("difference ") || window.location.href.indexOf("/wiki/Special:") != -1) return;

// if this is a watchlist, stop
if(document.getElementById("watchdetails") || window.location.href.indexOf("/wiki/Special:") != -1) return;

// if this is the main page, stop
if(document.getElementById("mainpage") || window.location.href.indexOf("/wiki/Special:") != -1) return;

// get the page title
var pageTitle = document.title.split(" - ")[0].replace(" ", "_");

// create div and set innerHTML to link
var divContainer = document.createElement("div");
divContainer.innerHTML = '<div class="editsection" style="float:right;margin-left:5px;margin-right:0px;margin-top:47px;">[<a href="/w/index.php?title='+pageTitle+'&action=edit&section=0" title="'+document.title.split(" - ")[0]+'">edit</a>]</div>';

// insert divContainer into the DOM below the h1
if(window.location.href.indexOf("&action=edit") == -1)
document.getElementById("content").insertBefore(divContainer, document.getElementsByTagName("h1")[0]);

if(window.location.href.indexOf("&action=edit&section=0") != -1)
document.getElementById("wpSummary").value = "/* Intro */ ";
});

// Import [[User:Lupin/popups.js]]

document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="http://en.wikipedia.org/w' +
'/index.php?title=User:Lupin/popups.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"></script>');
popupFixDabs = true;
imagePopupsForImages = false;

// jncsp-end