text:
Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Archive 1

Categories
On the list of categories, would it be better if we were to alphabetize them as we go along? --Aaron Walden 19:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Great idea Aaron - be bold and rearrange them ;) I would only recommend to leave the project cat on top, as it will surely be our main working reference. Great work on the userbox, btw!  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * We need to think about reorganizing and pruning the categories. I'm finding a lot of categories to add to the list. Most the categories have sub-categories, which have sub-sub-categories. I've found sixteen categories to add to the list tonight, and I'm still only reached the (now) 12th on the list. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  03:59, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, no kidding. There's a lot of them.  Wouldn't it work to just list the top categories, since the sub-categories are listed within each, anyway?  --Aaron Walden 04:36, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Unfortunatley no because the category structure is not a strict tree, i.e. not all sub cats are under the same cat, some aren't even under the right cat or may be under something totally unrelated. Like until I edited it tonight, Category:indigenous peoples of Mexico wasn't a sub cat of Category:Indigenous peoples of North America.  The cat system is too messy to trust it that way.  It would be easier if it were better organized, but it isn't.  Maybe we need a separate WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Working categories or something if the list gets giant.

 * Yes, Dalbury, you're right - the pile-on of categories is far greater than I expected. Imho, it's best to list subcats as well, since we wish a global overview of the location of all existing resources both for searching and (re)location purposes. However, now that the number of them that we've identified is making the list too large to be included at the project's main page, I suggest that we move it to a subpage. I also think that maybe we should split it a little more, following the same criteria that you've currently used, i.e. maybe a Culture subsection is in order - please, go ahead and follow your own ideas. You're doing a great job searching for cats and posting them here, guys - congrats!   Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 04:46, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and moved the cats to the subpage WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America/Working categories. Seemed like a logical thing to do.  psch  e  mp  |  talk  05:00, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * And I suppose another reason each must be listed is that future editors could come along and remove their sub-category status, rendering it an insufficient list. --Aaron Walden 06:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Some of the categories are very sparsely populated. Hopefully, new articles will help populate those categories, but we may want to consolidate some of them. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  11:45, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

 * My suspicion is that they are sparsley populated due to nobody knowing article should go there rather than there are no articles to go there. I've been working in related category schemes (all the archaeology cats for examples) and have seen this to be the case usually.  Let's hold off on merging until all the available data is collected.  I'm making it my project to deal with the cats and their populations and classifications.   psch  e  mp  |  talk  07:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * There are some candidates for merging on other grounds: Category:Native Americans' rights activists and Category:Native American activists, and Category:Lakota mythology, Category:Lakota deities, Category:Lakota goddesses and Category:Lakota gods. --  Dalbury ( Talk )  11:30, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Scope
Can we include Indians of Mexico too? They have no category and most of their articles are stubs (except Aztec). Needs a lot of work. I have some books on Mexican Indians in Spanish, so if the language is a barrier, maybe you could send those projects my way?--Rockero420 21:49, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * As long as we have users with expertise in the subject, like you seem to do, Rockero, I think the idea is great. Please, feel free to add the proper template to each article's Talk Page in order to identify them. As the project has just begun, the first step is to identify all artciles under its scope, and list them at the project page as soon as we have categorized them. I'll remake the templates in order to include Indigenous peoples of Mexico asap. Thank you for your cooperation, and welcome!  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 21:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

scope 2: prehistory?
hi.

question: how about including prehistory? (unless your meaning of "historic" includes prehistory as well). i note that the coverage of American archaeology is a rather weak point of Wikipedia.

peace – ishwar  (speak)  00:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed, dear Ish - in fact, now that we're going through the categorizing stages (an absolute must imho, in order to identify as many related articles as possible), I've already tagged a few artciles that fall into that period of time. Please, go ahead and include any others you see fit. Cheers!  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 00:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Inuit/Eskimo
The Inuit and other Eskimo-Aleut speaking peoples should also be included. What do you think? Also, it might be useful to invite the numerous people who have contributed to aboriginal-related articles. Luigizanasi 00:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Definetely, Luigi - in fact, I just went into a categorizing spree and tagged as many articles related to that group as I could. Again, I encourage you to seek any others you deem appropriate and tag them at their Talk Pages as well with the template. I also created an invitation template to let as many interested users as possible know of the existence of this project; you can add it at their Talk Pages with  . Welcome aboard, and happy editing!   Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 00:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Then the Wikiproject notification template should change to include them explicitly. They do not consider themselves First Nations, and would be insulted by the term. I would like to suggest the wording "Native American, First Nations, Inuit and Alaska Native". I would do it, but I fear I will probably screw it up. Luigizanasi 07:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Good, point, Luigi - I'm on it!  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 20:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Redlinked articles
There are a number of redlinked articles at List_of_U.S._military_history_events - it may be advisable to change the section title as well. Please note Native Americans in the United States instead of Indigenous peoples of North America as well - not sure if you want to move that. Another set of redlinks is at List_of_Native_American_Tribal_Entities - and I am sure you have more than enough to do without me mentioning redlinks so I will stop now. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the belated reply, KC - but please, don't shut up! On the contrary, your suggestions are most welcome. I had already noticed the many red links on the Indian Wars part of the list of US military events, since in fact it was my first interest in Wikipedia and my main one for some time. The difficulty to find information about several conflicts made me advance very slowly, but I managed to write a little about some of them, like Winnebago War and Peoria War. I find the subject fascinating (I actually joined the Wikiproject Military history to expand related articles), and I agree with you: at some point in the near future, thse topics should be included within the scope of this project. I recommend that we go a little slow at the beginning, since the task is already rather big and adding even more subjects may be daunting, but you're absolutely right - this can be (and hopefully will be) a very interesting area for future development. Cheers!  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 23:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Sitting Bull
I would love to help out this project. I think one of the articles that needs immediate attention is Sitting Bull. Just reading through it, the tone is wrong, it is not comprehensive, and needs major clean-up. It sounds like a 13-year old wrote it. I will help out when I get a chance, but I'm currently busy working on two other article. Gflores Talk 18:38, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Lot's of Indigenous information out here - All jumbled around!
Maybe we can come to a consensus to consolidate as much Indigenous information onto one page as possible, since everyone is Indigenous to somewhere? My current count for disambiguation pages is at least 20 (I stopped trying to count them). Anyone have any ideas on how to do this efficiently? -- <IP_ADDRESS> 07:16, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Some Examples:

 * Indigenous American
 * Indigenous peoples
 * Indigenous peoples in the United States
 * Native Americans in the United States
 * Native American name controversy

 * See the talk pages on those articles. There was substantial discussion back in September 2005 about the jumble of stuff in Native American, Indigenous people of the Americas, etc. The consensus reached was that three separate articles were needed and stuff was moved to the appropriate articles: Native Americans in the United States for the strictly US-related material, Indigenous peoples of the Americas for an overview, and Native American name controversy for the material related to collective names. Luigizanasi 16:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Reservations
I notice your list of articles has no category for reservations/reserves. We have a number of these articles (List of Native American reserves in Canada, List of Indian reservations in the United States will help find them.) I also noticed that while we have a list of U.S. federally recognized tribes and a list of U.S. state recognized tribes, I couldn't find a list of U.S. unrecognized tribes. I only know 3 or 4 which is hardly enough to justify starting a list but there should be a large number in Virginia, New England and California. Rmhermen 21:32, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Capitalization of terms
Hi all - Currently the term "Indigenous" is capitalized the majority of the time when used on the WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America article. However, over at Indigenous peoples, it is capitalized the minority of times it is used. It would be quite helpful to establish a naming convention for use on Wikipedia regarding whether or not the ethnic group term "Indigenous" and its synonym "Aboriginal" should be capitalized all the time, none of the time, or perhaps some of the time and in which general cases. Aboriginal peoples in Canada may be helpful to a discussion. Kurieeto 23:14, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
 * This is a valid point, Kuri - I simply used the capitalization every time we mention the project's name more as a title than a naming convention for indigenous peoples themselves. My humble opinion is, that it should not be capitalized if we actually mean indigenous peoples, and only use the capitalization when mentioning the project's full name. Again, your input is more than welcome.  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 23:17, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Arguments in favour of capitalization include that "Indigenous" should be capitalized like other ethnic terms, such as Arabic, Asian, or German. Also, the policy of the Government of Canada is that "Indigenous means 'native to the area.' In this sense, Aboriginal people are indeed indigenous to North America. As a proper name for a people, the term is capitalized to form 'Indigenous peoples.'" .  Just so I'm clear on your rationale, what are your arguments in favour of not capitalizing the term? Kurieeto 12:56, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I think the most appropriate place for a discussion about the capitalization/non-capitalization of "indigenous peoples" would be Talk:Indigenous peoples, so I've begun a new discussion about the matter there. Kurieeto 13:36, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Lists
Not sure were it would fit on the project page, these lists are fertile ground for finding red-links.

 * List of Indian reservations in the United States
 * List of Native American Tribal Entities
 * List of Alaska Native Tribal Entities
 * List of State Recognized American Indian Tribal Entities
 * List of U.S. Indian Tribal Government Web sites - not redlinks but very incomplete
 * List of Aboriginal communities in Canada - on list of most red-linked Wikipedia articles
 * List of place names in Canada of Aboriginal origin
 * Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas - listed for possible merge
 * List of Native American tribes - listed for possible merge
 * Indigenous languages of the Americas
 * Classification schemes for indigenous languages of the Americas - not wikified
 * List of First Nations peoples

I couldn't find any list of Archeological cultures/complexes. (List of pre-Columbian civilizations is related but very incomplete and Cultural periods of Peru could be a format guide.) Rmhermen 15:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I started List of archaeological cultures in North America. Rmhermen 18:00, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * List of First Nations has ample red links as well. Kurieeto 16:10, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * These lists can certainly provide rich reference to artciles that we need to work on. Perhaps it would be a good idea to broaden our Categories sections to "Working lists and categories", and add them to the proper subpage. What do you think?  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 23:15, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
 * List of Indigenous people of the Americas is mostly blue-links but not very comprehensive (although it covers a slightly larger group than the topic of this project, it is sectioned by modern nations.) Rmhermen 16:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Two projects
Here's a possible goal for the project: make sure Wikipedia has an article for each entry listed in the Encyclopedia of North American Indians, a good online resource, written by scholars. Like the Dictionary of Candian Biography project, a systematic approach could be adopted, making sure each Wikipedia article has an external link to the online source.

Speaking of the Canadian Biography project, there are a lot of "red links" to native names there, so that's another place where project members here could do some good work, starting new Wikipedia entries for as-yet overlooked biographies.

As always, when I say "somebody" ought to do something, I mean "somebody other than me." --Kevin Myers | (complaint dept.) 03:17, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

 * hi. i think is ok.

 * however, i suggest also that the Handbook of North American Indians published (and still being published) by the Smithsonian Institution is an excellent source to guide what is missing here by simply taking note of the table of contents in each volume. It is more comprehensive than the website mentioned above. Some volumes are out-of-date by now, but still this is the single best reference in the English language on general North American info. peace – ishwar  (speak)  09:55, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

 * oh yes, i didnt mention before, but the reference i provided of Landar's (1973) "checklist" is something like Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas except that it is bigger (at 188 pages) with synonymy cross-indexing (we know all the alternate historical names of peoples & languages can drive newcomers to Indian scholarship crazy). this may be useful to see what is missing – ishwar  (speak)  10:03, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Another online source people should keep in mind are the famous McKenney-Hall portraits. (Between 1821 and 1842, many American Indian leaders who came to sign treaties in Washington D.C. had their portraits painted, mostly by Charles Bird King.) These portraits were published as lithographs in the 19th century, and are all over the Internet, like here. Someone might want to make a list of these portraits, to make sure Wikipedia has them all and their corresponding articles. --Kevin Myers | (complaint dept.) 05:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Flags of Indigenous Peoples
I feel that the article Flags of indigenous peoples should be addressed in this project, however, it is proposed for merger with Flags of non-sovereign nations (which proposal I am not in favor of). At present Flags of non-sovereign nations has flags of more indigenous nations of North America listed than does Flags of indigenous peoples. --Aaron Walden 09:43, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I am inclined to oppose that merge too. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, Aaron - I'd like to see Flags of indigenous peoples under our scope as well. On a side note, I'll have rough time logging in this week, but I'll try to asses and add as many articles to our lists as possible, and maybe create a new sublist or two as well. Hopefully, we'll have as many of the ancillary articles as our lists properly assessed soon, so we can get to work on the most important part of the project: expanding and improving them. Cheers,  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 01:32, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Article classification tables
Well I STARTED out to add the BIA as a relevant article, but I can never remember the color codes for the article types!!! So I added a column to the article types table with the hex code values. In doing so I decided that it would make sense to resectionalise (adding Grading scheme) so I could edit just that section and not all of the other tables at the same time (they get a lot of edit traffic), and that maybe a sample table would be good, explaining the columns of the article tables. Maybe redundant as they are mostly self explanatory but maybe it will be of use. Comments welcomed if you didn't like what I did. ++Lar: t/c 15:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Template:User WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America 2
I created this ^^ messagebox template for those of us who use messageboxes to show project affiliations. It's bog standard, I just copied the WikiProject Bridges template, so it doesn't have the nifty image at left (that could be fixed I guess?)that the userbox does. Hopefully some will find it of use. ++Lar: t/c 21:31, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Nations, tribes and groups
How long do we want this list to be for now? I have several articles on tribes I could add, but they are all extinct tribes, and extinct and minor tribes would make for a long list. --  Donald Albury (Dalbury) ( Talk )  00:02, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * A very valid point, Dalbury. My own opinion is that only recognized tribes, or maybe only those with a somewhat higher degree of historical importance should be included at the list at the Project page; not that I wouldn't like to see every tribe that ever existed there, but simply because, as you say, it would be incredibly long. While we're at this, I may also ask your opinion about including subtribes which have an article about themselves, most notably the subgroups of the Apache (Mescalero, Jicarilla, Chiricahua, etc.) Should we also add them, or consider them already present by listing the main article only? Your input will be very appreciated.  Phædriel   ♥ tell me - 00:13, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Length by itself is not a major criterion. If it gets too long, portions can be moved into subpages, e.g., extinct tribes. However, I've seen instances where lists are so long that their meaning and content is largely lost. Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:32, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * In my case, it's also a matter of minor articles about minor tribes, for which solid information is quite sparse. I'll leave my group of minor articles about little-known, extinct tribes off the list for now. Some are still just stubs, and all of them can be expanded. I hope to work on them again, when I have the time. --  Donald Albury (Dalbury) ( Talk )  01:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't have much advice on how to handle sub-tribes. I suspect a case-by-case analysis will be required. As I understand it, what is a tribe and what is a sub-tribe or other division of a tribe is often an artificial construct, imposed by we white men to allow the BIA bureaucrats to think they had a handle on the "Indian problem". The extant tribes have now developed their own definitions of who they are, but I'm not sure that helps us in describing pre-Twentieth century tribes. I've only worked on articles on pre-Seminole tribes in southern Florida, and my research doesn't give me much confidence in the delineation of the "tribes" described in the literature. --  Donald Albury (Dalbury) ( Talk )  01:47, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

 * re Apache Tribe: there never was an Apache tribe. They were often enemies and not sub-tribes of common political social grouping. Apache is simply a convenient linguistic/cultural grouping. This is just a note and not an argument for listing them separately on the Project page.

 * suggestion: Why not have separate pages based on culture area? These wouldnt need to be shown on the main Project page. Perhaps this will prevent marginalization of less important groups (degree of importance is, of course, a bias of the history writer). Since this Project covers a very large and diverse continent, I think that we should expect incredibly long lists. I guess wouldnt want to be left out because I wasnt important. Question 2: what needs to be on the main page anyway?

 * - 22:16, 2006 February 20 User:ish ishwar

 * I have come to agree that it would be best to deal with the major groupings in the initial stage, as it would be overwhelming otherwise, and well-contructed articles will have links to the sub-groupings, anyway.  However, the point regarding the Apache is well-noted.  This might well compare to the Iriquoian tribes.  They are historically separate tribes and should be treated as such. --Aaron Walden 19:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Somewhere else I've commented that the subgroupings in Canada would be immensely long in their own right; as individual villages/clans are independent nations in their own self-description; and in some cases the divisions do not correspond to language-cultural links/affinities; comments below adapted or concerning existing Wiki pages:
 * Kwakiutl vs Kwagyuilh vs Kwakwaka'wakw - all currently lumped under Kwakiutl, which is the usual name for the Kwak'wala-speaking peoples of northern Vancouver Island, Queen Charlotte Strait and the Johnstone Strait in the Canadian province of British Columbia. Kwakiutl peoples include:
 * Kwakwaka'wakw - (Queen Charlotte Strait)
 * Kwagyuilh - Northern Kwakiutl (Fort Rupert)
 * Laich-kwil-tach - aka Legwiltok, Yucultas or Euclataws, aka Southern Kwakiutl (Campbell River/Quadra Island). Just to confuse matters further, the Southern Kwakiutl are divided between the Weiwaikai and Weywakum
 * Kwakiutl is also erroneously used to describe Oweekyala speakers just north of the Kwak'wala speaking region; "Northern Kwakiutl" (in its historic context, not in reference to Fort Rupert) are Haisla, Oweekeeno and others in the central Skookum1 05:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Gitksan-Wet'su-we'ten Confederacy: this political grouping predates the advent of the Colony of British Columbia and their political inheritance/legacy was central to the Delgamuukw vs the Queen legal case. The Confederacy bridges the Tsimshian-speaking Gitksan with the Carrier/Athapaskan-speaking Wet'su-we'ten; there is currently no separate Gitksan article (from the Tsimshian article, that is); not sure about the Carrier/Wet'su-we'ten.
 * the St'at'imcets speaking communities are now three separate political units, with the largest further divided between Upper and Lower St'at'imc; the latter is usually known as Lil'wat. Of the Upper St'at'imc each band (of six) is self-described as a nation, and the northernmost at Pavilion, Tskwaylaxw First Nation, is also a member of the Bonaparte grouping of the Shuswap Nation (Secwepemc).  The smaller St'at'imcets-culture political units are the In-SHUCK-ch Nation (a breakaway of the Lower Lillooet) and the N'quatqua First Nation (also sp. Nequatque), originally a breakaway from the Upper St'at'imc into the In-SHUCK-ch Nation but since incorporated into its own entity.  The Douglas (Xa'xtsa) Band of the In-SHUCK-ch are also members of the Sto:lo regional council (itself also composed of several subnations, and excluding the Chehalis First Nation which lies in between Douglas and the Sto:lo "mainstream" of the rest of the Fraser Valley).
 * the Nicola national grouping is an amalgam of the Nlaka'pamux-related Sce'emx and the Upper Similkameen (Syilx) branch of the Okanagan people; and at some time in the past absorbed the now-exting Stuwix people, also known as the Nicola Athapaskans, who migrated into the area from the north two or three hundred years ago.

And that's just for starters, of the ones I'm familiar with the multiple-cultures/organizations of; don't know enough about the Shuswap, Nootka and Central Coast to comment but the situation is similar; the Nuu-chah-nulth organization excludes other Aht speakers, notably the Ditidaht (Nitinat); all are culturally linked also to the Makah.Skookum1 07:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Native Americans in the United States
Just thought I would bring this up here: Native Americans in the United States failed its first FAC nomination, largely due to issues of referencing and POV. Most of the issues have been worked on, but as one of the larger articles that is included under this Wikiproject, I think that this article deserves a bit more work. I have nominated this article at the United States Collaboration of the Week- please vote or comment. AndyZ 22:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Ward Churchill
I'm not part of this project, and I'm not qualified to make a decision on this (and don't have any stake in making one either). The Ward Churchill article has the NorthAmNative tag on the talk page. However, Churchill's North American native ancestry appears to be a false claim by Churchill. So I was wondering if the Churchill article should really be part of this project? – Doug Bell talk•contrib 18:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Even if he weren't of Native American ancestry, his scholarly contributions to the field of Native American studies would merit his inclusion in the project, which is comprehensive of all topics and individuals relating American Indians.--Rockero420 19:20, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Strongly agree with Rockero420. See Talk:Ward Churchill for more on this.  Basically, I think Doug Bell isn't particularly interested in NA issues, but just wants to snipe at Churchill.  Obviously, whatever his ancestry, Churchill wrote lots of books and articles that touch on NA issues. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not terribly interested in the motivations, whether it was just to "snipe at Churchill" or whatever, however, not only his contributions to the field of Native American studies put him within the scope of this project, so does the controversy regarding his alleged tribal membership, in my opinion. --Aaron Walden 20:56, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I already stated that I wasn't particularly interested/knowledgable in NA issues and I wasn't "sniping at Churchill". I was merely raising an issue without any prejudice as to how to handle it.  Lulu, you don't have to always disparage my comments.  It's actually better to assume good faith, as I try to do with you. – Doug Bell talk•contrib 21:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Jeffrey Vernon Merkey a Native American peoples project subject?
User:Waya sahoni has recently started to add the tag to the talk page of the Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article (a biography of an infamous net personality and Cherokee). However, various editors feel that the tag is inappropriate for that article. I, for example, feel that the tag lends undue weight to the Cherokee background of Mr. Merkey, and understand this project to be about Native American culture, not it's individual members. Moreover, editors of the article believe that User:Waya sahoni is in fact Jeff Merkey himself, and is as such biased as to the importance of the tag. Whatever the reasons, User:Waya sahoni insists on re-adding the tag whenever an editor removes it from the page, and I find myself in conflict with his edits.

To resolve this conflict peaceably, I have created a straw poll on the subject. I would really appreciate to get some input from editors working on this project as well, as you would be better judges of the appropriateness of the tag. I am looking for feedback on wether the Jeffrey Vernon Merkey article should be considered part of the Native American Peoples project or not. Thanks! --MJ( ☎ 18:13, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * MJ, I have said before I am not Jeff. Please stop violating WP:NPA.  To the project, MJ is an SCOX message board member and POV pusher in that article.  The RFC concluded and the POV materials are being removed to the article can at least achieve a B-Class status.  Waya sahoni 08:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi MJ: I'll go vote in the straw poll too. Basically, I believe that the Native American tag belongs on Merkey's talk page.  I would not doubt that he has created additional sockpuppet accounts, as we have seen before. But that's an unrelated issue: Mr. Merkey is indeed a tribal member, and has even been active in tribal politics.  He may be notable primarily for other things, but that is equally true of many Native Americans who would be appropriately identified as Indian within their page. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

The straw poll outcome is that the tag is retained as it turns out to be a valid tag to place on biography articles. --MJ( ☎ 07:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * And MJ and his buddies from SCOX have been vandalizing our tags in that article. Waya sahoni 08:10, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

 * What exactly is your fixation with "SCOX"? Would you please explain exactly what this "SCOX" is?

 * Could it be that you, as Jeff Merkey, was banned from Yahoo! message boards generally after your relentless attacks, your homophobic insults, and your threats of litigation against any and all who had the nerve to expose or contradict your nonsense?

 * Please describe exactly what experience have you had with Y! SCOX that leads you to speak of it in such derogatory and pejorative terms, implying that somewhere, somehow, there is some deep, dark conspiracy happening at this mystical "SCOX" and that its target is you, you you... -- talks_to_birds 10:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Question about jumping in.
I have been a passive user of Wikipedia for a few years now, but havent ever really jumped into a project yet. I fell into this discussion page researching the Dawes Act, and would love to get involved. Growing up in the american midwest (Oklahoma) and being a successful debator (on the subject of native peoples) in high school and college, i have a somewhat extensive library of secondary research on philosophical and (less so) hystorical issues relating to natives. In the hopes of contributing informative, useful, and in compliance with Wikipedia's NPOV, I was wondering if I should just back up and pick an unassigned subject, or get with a specific person to find out what needs to be done in what order. cheers. micheal. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cecilgol (talk • contribs) 14:57, 7 March 2006.

 * Hi Michael, and welcome to Wikipedia! It's a Wiki, just jump in. Pick a topic that needs more references, or one that's empty, or one that strikes your fancy, and start editing. Source your work by providing cites if you possibly can, to reduce controversy. But... No need to check with other people about what to do. Hope that helps. PS: don't forget to sign your posts with ~ so we know who you are... + +Lar: t/c 20:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
 * For instance, you could start at the Dawes Act article which needs work. Any number of tribes and reservations have no article at all - it's easy to get a short article going. Good luck. Rmhermen 22:22, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, welcome to the project. --Aaron Walden [[Image:Tsalagisigline.gif]] 12:20, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

A Month's Worth of Progress
It appears to me that we have just completed the first month of this project. I wanted to say thanks to everyone who's jumped in and brought things so far, and thanks to Phædriel for getting it rolling and lending structure. Not only has the project already come a long way in organizing things, but a lot of work has been done on the articles themselves as a result of the attention in this project. Keep up the good work. --Aaron Walden 13:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Assessment
It may be too late to bring this up, but might I suggest we not assess our own articles? Every editor feels like they do a fantastic job on their own articles, or else they wouldn't write them. It just seems like other people might make fairer evaluations than the writer him- or her-self.--Rockero 18:29, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I've done the initial assessment on my articles as I add them to the list, as a rough indicator of the status of the article, but I have also asked that others do the real assessment. --  Donald Albury ( Talk )  22:54, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

 * As long as we're on the subject, it needs to be pointed out that the Featured Article assessment is reserved for those articles which have been nominated and named as official Wikipedia Featured Articles. --Aaron Walden [[Image:Tsalagisigline.gif]] 00:18, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Concur. I was terribly confused to see so many articles with the FA status, while I can only find one on the list of featured articles.  Perhaps this could be rectified? --KSevcik 14:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * All of these non-featured "featured" articles were assesed by Waya sahoni. I have remove such rankings of his before. Perhaps someone should discuss it with him. One of those he listed this way is currrently blanked as a possible copyright violation. Rmhermen 16:44, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree this is very problematic. Authors should not review their own work.  Also, our criteria for coloring an article green in the table is clearly set out as: "Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles."  Several of the ones we are calling Featured Articles have never ever been Featured Article Candidates, much less approved as Featured Articles. Listing them as FA's is seriously harmful to the reputation of this project. Johntex\talk 20:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed the erroneous FA's and left a message for Waya sahoni explaining my actions. That still leaves us with the the need to create a good process to ensure writers are not reviewing their own work. Johntex\talk 21:00, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hello, I have taken out some of your article rankings at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Indigenous_peoples_of_North_America. The criteria state that "green" and FA are used for articles that have actually passed the Featured Article process.  It is not for articles we think should pass, or that may pass some day.  There is only one FA in the project: Mandan.  I took out all the others.  Also, please note that there is discussion ongoing on the talk page about whether we should review articles where we are the main contributor. We look forward to your thoughts. Johntex\talk 20:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi John, thanks for the kind message regarding this issue. I would suggest you update the main page which describes the ranking process as it specifically instructs editors to evaluate any article and tag them.  This would certainly help clear up such issues.  My well meaning by obviously mistaken actions were based upon these instructions.  Something to consider.  Waya sahoni 00:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Waya sahoni, just to clarify - I don't think you were wrong to review articles you worked on, because at this time, our project does not say that is bad. I am proposing that we should adopt some sort of limitation on self-review for the future.  Clearly, you can't be faulted for going against something that is still under discussion!  I only object to the FA tagging because I think our criteria on that is spelled out currently. Best, Johntex\talk 16:28, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I assessed a few of mine if they were just stubs. --Aaron Walden [[Image:Tsalagisigline.gif]] 00:46, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, I cannot see anyone objecting to the assessment of articles to stub status by the authors. :-) Waya sahoni

Personal attacks
Unfortunately, User:Waya sahoni has reverted my assessments of some articles he has been principle author on. In doing so, he both dramatically overrates the articles (he had formerly claimed them all as Featured Articles, in plain disagreement with the fact of FA approval). Moreover, his edits replaced the article assessments with plain-old personal attacks on me (because of some odd grudges about me trying to clean up some articles he's edited in). If editors in this project could keep an eye on such WP:PA reversions, it would be appreciated.
 * I didn't alter any grading of the article. I just replaced the credits removed by the non-Author of the content attempting to take credit for my work.  Waya sahoni 08:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, you did increase the grade of articles you are principle author on. But that's not the point, really.  See this talk page please: clear consensus is that evaluations should be written by someone other than the main author of the articles evaluated.  The appropriate evaluator of Joe Byrd (Cherokee Chief) is anyone other than you! Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 08:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Lulu, I give up. Your edit summaries are inaccurate, and you know nothing about the subject matter.  The best course is to ignore you since you stop editing when the golden goose stops laying eggs for you.  Then you just sit idle.  I think I'll sit idle around you until you latch onto someone else to follow around the site and glom onto articles they are working on.  Your editing style is too disruptive for me to deal with.  You are like a bull in a china shop.  I am certain we will have some terse and bare articles with you "helping" by tagging everything for deletion, copyvio, bogus tags for one upmanship and control, CoNtRoL, CONTROL CCOONNTTRROOLL.... Oh, where did Waya go? Then the articles get abadonned when you get bored and your subject moves on. Waya sahoni 08:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This is classic. Nobody but Waya can edit articles started by Waya?! Everyone is out to get waya? If he can't have everything exactly his way, he's going to take his ball and go home? What part of 'your articles may be mercilessly edited' didn't you understand? Vigilant 00:18, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Notice, FWIW, that the above note was first posted by the Provo Utah IP address <IP_ADDRESS>, which has been used by Jeff Merkey, and blocked as such, then quickly changed to contain the Waya sahoni signature. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 08:50, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Gadugi has never used this address based on CheckUser. Don't be fooled by the bogus tag placed there by the SCOX stalkers and meat puppets.  Check the edit summary.  Also input the address to CheckUser, it's never been used by Gadugi.  Lulu, Link to CheckUser please? Waya sahoni 09:07, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Hmmm... I suppose you're not familiar with WP adminstravia; I only am more-or-less by accident. Only a limited subset of administrators have access to the CheckUser, and a special request must be made to them to use it when there are issues of sockpuppets and block evasions.  So your claim to know what CheckUser returns is plainly false... unless you may have certain other ways of knowing what IP addresses Jeff Merkey uses (but haven't kept a very accurate track over time, it appears).  It might be time to dig up an admin with CheckUser privileges though.
 * Here's a thought: given your insistence, against the preponderance of evidence, that you are "not Jeff Merkey", maybe you could say what your name is. And try to come up with one who actually graduated from SMU law school (as you've alleged, giving a graduation year), and who has a doctorate in something else (also suggesting a school and a year).  And someone who is Cherokee and lives in Texas.  If all those things are actually true of you providing such details should flow right off the top of your head... on the other hand, if there is a certain prevarication involved, I think you'll have difficulty finding a name that meets all the claims (especially one who wouldn't vehemently disclaim being you).  I'm not 1/10th the sleuth of many of the editors on WP; but I'm sure a number of them would be happy to check the existence of a name meeting all these alleged biographical events.  Good luck with that :-). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 09:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Requests for Checkuser shows no such link between my IP and Jeff. Stop making personal attacks.  Thanks. Waya sahoni 16:53, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I have myself made minor edits to Jeff Merkey, United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, and Joe Byrd (Cherokee Chief) which I annotated. I will certainly defer to the article evaluation of any other editor who has not edited it, if you feel my comments are not balanced or accurate. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 04:22, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This editor is involved in an ARBCOM and has been defacing and disrupting project articles I work on. He is not knowledgable of the subject. He has been acussed of stalking merely to revert another editors work.  He needs to post his allegations on the WP:RFAR page and not here.  Waya sahoni 06:27, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Just for background, the so-called RfAr is at Requests for arbitration. It's just a silly abusre of WP adminstrative procedures that isn't going to go anywhere.  Editors here who'd like to opine are welcome to.
 * But also, the annotations Waya sahoni keeps inserting personal attacks into are:
 * Joe Byrd (Cherokee Chief), which is primarily written by Waya sahoni;
 * Jeff Merkey whom most WP editors involved believe to be the same person as Waya sahoni (Waya sahoni denies it, though they share an email address, IP address, business, writing style, and Waya sahoni describes himself as a "blood relative" of Merkey).
 * FALSE and WP:NPA. Stop junking up our project page.  I'm certain the ARBCOM would like to hear all about it.  Post this stuff there -> WP:RFAR.  Thanks. Waya sahoni 07:58, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * In neither case should Waya sahoni be writing the annotations and making the evaluation. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 07:16, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't think this is productive or appropriate. This is the talk page for the Wikiproject. This hostile tone does not help. Perhaps all three of you (Lulu, Waya, and the suddenly involved Vigilant) can avoid the articles you disagree on for a few days and expand coverage of some of the articles that need it. An awful lot of Indigenous Issues are still uncovered in Wikipedia. TriNotch 01:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Do y'all need a hug? --Aaron Walden 13:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

NorthAm-native-stub Image
Hello fellow Wikipedians. Over at Template talk:NorthAm-native-stub, Harmil has raised a concern about whether our existing image for the stub notice, looks good at the size we are using for the stub notice. I share this concern. Therefore, I am proposing a new image for the stub notice. Please join in the discussion if you like. Thanks, Johntex\talk 20:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * What if we swapped it with the Sitting Bull image in the Project box? Then both images could still be in use, and it would be easier to see. --Aaron Walden [[Image:Tsalagisigline.gif]] 20:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Aaron, I put your suggestion on the Template talk:NorthAm-native-stub page, and I also posted a sample there of what that would look like. Johntex\talk 21:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I vote for sitting bull too and its good, but has anyone tried Chief Joseph yet? If Aaron wants Sitting Bull, ni-go-di-s-ge-s-di (That's just the way it is). Waya sahoni 03:09, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, I swapped the two images. Sitting Bull is now on the stub, and the Edward Curtis picture is now on the article notice.  Please let me know how this works for everyone.  Thanks, Johntex\talk 01:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I substituted an optimized version of the Curtis pic at Template:NorthAmNative. Just a bit of gamma correction, color saturation reduction, brightness/contrast tweaking, then an optimized scaling.  It was way too orange in the existing version, IMO, rather than sepia.  I tried the 150px that it had been sized at; after looking, I thought 125px is actually plenty for that template.  I'm deferring to Johtex' judgement on which images to use where, but I figure I can make the chosen images look better with a slight bit of graphic manipulation. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 01:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Lulu - I think the two images look much better this way because the Sitting Bull image is so distinctive even at small size. It seemed like there were no objections to this swap idea, so I went for it.  We can always go back (or go to a third option) if we want to later.  I like your modifications also, thanks for taking the time to improve the images. Johntex\talk 02:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

A Call to all Native Americans on Wikipedia
Our brother, User:Waya sahoni has had his userpage blocked and his talkpage protected from being edited. I realize there have been some disputes, but is all of this really necessary? We should stand beside our brother. --Bookofsecrets 05:05, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

 * How hilarious... after his block he "revoked all rights" to the copyvio images he had recently uploaded, and that he had strenously defended as being in the public domain when their permissions were questioned. I definitely encourage everyone to take a look at User talk:Waya sahoni for an amusing read. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 06:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Also, this off site project of his is in violation of the GFDL agreement becuase they have taken content from Wikipedia without proper attribution, and by attempting to relicense it under soemthing other than the GFDL. This is a serious offense. Johntex\talk 20:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Waya sahoni shows too much anger to be allowed to return so soon. I believe we will see him here with a new username sooner or later, anyway. I do hope that next time he shows more restraint. Wadoli Itse 14:13, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

 * This is an inappropriate username. "Wa-do-li" translates as "penis" (search on wa-do-li with google) and "it-se" means "new".  No Cherokee would pronouce or combine these words in this manner.  This username is inappropriate and offensive to any Cherokee Speaker.  The way these words is Combined is also wrong.  It word have been spoken Wa-do-li It-se a-gi-ha (I have this).  signed Cherokee Speaker. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk • contribs)

 * Google results

 * Cherokee, Cherokee Ancestry, Cherokee Language, Native American ...
 * ... pecan so-hi--a-ni-nv-hi-da. pen ga-ne-he--gv-di-di-go-wi-lo-di. pencil
 * di-go-we-lo-di. penis wa'-do-li. penis wa'-do. people a-ni-yo-ne-ga. people a-ni- ...
 * drstandley.com/nativeamerican_ppp.shtml - 51k - Supplemental Result - Cached - Similar pages
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk • contribs)

 * My user name is not Cherokee. However, in case it really offends the Cherokee people, or any other nation of planet Earth, I have already offered (on my Talk page) to change it. I cannot do that myself, though. (I understand that a help from an administrator is needed). Before that, I would like to hear a second opinion, but not by another socket puppet of Gadugi. Wadoli Itse 10:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * From Cherokee language:
 * I want a turkey..... gv na a wa do li
 * From Indian town names:
 * "It-se-yi" or "New Green Place"
 * I see no obscenities. --MJ( ☎ 15:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * There is only one page that google returns that has both the offensive word and the phrase wa do li on the same page (the other hit is a parked link page linking to the first). All other uses of wa do li are referring to the I want a turkey phrase, and I also saw wa do as meaning thank you and v-wa-do-li as store house or provision house. I am certainly no expert on the language, but I find little evidence to support the rather strong allegation. Unfortunately, the accuser has a long history of unsubstantiated allegations making me take this one with a big grain of salt. --MJ( ☎ 15:22, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I see a legitimate reason why "this user" could be mistaken. According to this Cherokee dictionary the word he means is "wa'-do". Wadoli Itse 15:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The Wa'-do indicates a glottal stop (') -- two words, and is pronounced different than wa-do (which is one word and not two). I have been speaking Cherokee for about 39 years, so I think I am familiar with the language.  Adding the verb stem modifiers doesn't change the words this person selected.  -yi means "the place of".  It-se-yi simply means "New Place of" not "New green place".  The word wadoli is considered exceptionally vulgar (as most profane words in Cherokee) and also is used in phrases which imply mast__bation. These non Cherokee who look up words online and try to use them is comical.  The account uses an inappropriate name that translates as "New Penis". —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk • contribs)

 * While this Cherokee word list shows that "wa-do" (no apostrophe) means "thank you". I have no aposthophe in my user name. I do hope this end this matter.Wadoli Itse 15:56, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

 * And Wadoli means what I said it does. —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk • contribs)

 * Stop being silly. You admitted yourself that "wa-" and "wa'-" are different sounds in Cherokee. I have the first one in my name. Do you see obscenities everywhere you look? Wadoli Itse 16:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I would like to suggest that this entire thread be refactored to someone's talk page or somewhere other than this project page. It just doesn't seem appropriate for a project of this importance and seriousness to see threads disputing the meaning of some sylables in a userid. I would humbly ask that you all either stop, or take it somewhere else. (there are places on WP to raise the issue of inappropriate usernames) + +Lar: t/c 17:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest finishing the subject. This user does not hide he's the blocked. He was aware of myself and my username since 01:32, 17 March 2006 when   asked him if I am him. My name did not seem obscene to him at the time. It took him over three days until 04:43, 20 March 2006 to get shocked. What happened in between? He got blocked. I wrote a comment saying that he should not be unblocked, yet (see above). And now my name is utterly obscene. Therefore, I am sure he is not acting in good faith. Wadoli Itse 17:35, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

That's as may be, and I'm not saying it is not worth following up on this. Just not here. Too far out of scope for this project. IMHO. Hence my suggestion that the right place be found and this conversation moved there. Again IMHO. + +Lar: t/c 18:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

SERIOUS ATTENTION NEEDED: The call to all Indigenous editors of the Wikipedia Indigenous project needs some refinement. The call for editors should include a watchgroup that makes notes and attempts to identify editors that have come into this project that are "wolves in sheeps clothing". Meaning that the real reason that certain editors have come onto this project is to insert anti-Indian rhetoric. In fact, on editor that is a member of this Indigenous project is a leader of an anti-Indian hate group. His username is Dtwarren, check him out. He is proud of his drive for the eradication of the Seneca Nation, and is more than willing to use and spread past racist court and federal policy precedent to acheive this end. I am Seneca, and hopefully like you, do not want to be "Wikipediafied" out of existence by anyone. I am asking for you help, please take a few minutes and look up this editor and decided for yourself. I am sure that this individual is not the only one out here, but currently his actions are the most egregious. Nya'weh. Scuggy 17:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


text:
Internet Technologies/VNC

Virtual Network Computing (VNC) is a remote desktop protocol to remote control another computer. VNC is used to transport the desktop environment of a graphical user interface from one computer to a viewer application on another computer on the network. There are clients and servers for many platforms including Linux, Microsoft Windows, Berkeley Software Distribution variants and MacOS X. In fact you would be hard pressed to not find a viewer available for any GUI operating system. The VNC protocol allows for complete platform independence. A VNC viewer on any operating system can connect to a VNC server on any other operating system. It is also possible for multiple clients to connect to a VNC server at the same time. Popular uses of the technology include remote tech support, and accessing your files on your work PC while at home or even on the road. There is even a Java viewer for VNC, so you can connect to a VNC server from your web browser without installing any software. The original VNC code is open source, as are many of the flavors of VNC available today.

How it works
VNC is actually two parts, a client and a server. A server is the machine that is sharing its screen, and the client, or viewer is the program that is doing the watching and perhaps interacting with the server. VNC is actually a VERY simple protocol and is based one one and only one graphic primitive, "Put a rectangle of pixel data at a given x,y position". What this means is VNC takes small rectangles of the screen (actually the framebuffer) and transports them from the server to the client. This in its simplest form would cause lots of bandwidth to be used, and hence various methods have been invented to make this process go faster. There are now many different 'encodings' or methods to determine the most efficient way to transfer these rectangles. The VNC protocol allows the client and server to negotiate which encoding it will use. The simplest and lowest common denominator is the raw encoding method where the pixel data is sent in left-to-right scanline order, and after initial setup, then only transfers the rectangles that have changed.

how to copy and paste
How do I copy-and-paste from applications running on a server (visible inside a local VNC window) to applications running locally (outside the VNC window) and back?

Some people   suggest using xcutsel or autocutsel as a work-around:

On the VNC server side (inside the VNC window) run " ". Leave it up and running.
 * 1. If you want to copy from VNC to local, select what you want to copy, then click "copy PRIMARY to 0" in xcutsel, then paste in local.
 * 2. If you want to copy from local to VNC, select what you want to copy, then click "copy 0 to PRIMARY" in xcutsel, then paste in VNC window.

Others recommend autocutsel (or is it autcutsel?), pointing at the VNC FAQ.

For more about the subtleties of cutting and pasting in the X Window System, see "X Selections, Cut Buffers, and Kill Rings." by Jamie Zawinski 2002 (especially helpful if you are writing X11 applications).

source: wikimedia

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

title: Internet Technologies/VNC


text:
Talk:Anglo-Saxon royal genealogies

please remove the links that redirect the user back to this page. it is quite annoying.

Merger
I have merged much text from Ancestry of the kings of Wessex into this page. Please see Talk:Ancestry of the kings of Wessex for my rationale. Agricolae (talk) 02:53, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Misleading verses Original Text
The original text of the genealogies has been removed as misleading. Why is this? Paul Bedson ❉ talk ❉ 22:19, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The table was unnecessary detail and does not belong in this article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:36, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The true text is misleading and unnecessary! This does not begin resolving or explaining the question of disputed factual accuracy on this page, it doesn't even start... Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 22:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Paul, you are being less than honest again. This article is about a body of genealogical material that includes the Anglian collection, Bede, Nennius, AEthelweard, the Chronicle and an Essex pedigree of unknown derivation.  To insert text that there is an 'original source' for this body of material, some of which predates, some of which is completely independent of, and some of which shares a common source with but is not derived from your favorite source, is what is misleading.  The list of names is not misleading - it is simply an unnecessary duplication, as the names in the different manuscripts are already summarized in the existing text and thus a second accounting of the same information is redundant. Agricolae (talk) 23:12, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, and Paul, the source you have cited for the names does not contain that information, and those bs you are putting in the middle of the names aren't bs, they are thorns. Agricolae (talk) 03:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You have quoted manuscripts and then made up your own names, claiming them as the source. These are unreliable, factually innacurrate, completely false, fabricated hoodoo. Please put the disputed tag back until resolved. I am also putting an NPOV on it as you appear to be only one source, along with a good chunk of imagination. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 13:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Paul, please quote a manuscript name from the current version of the article that you believe to be made up. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The name forms used are those found in the cited sources, which as per Wikipedia policy is a scholarly secondary sources in each case. It does draw heavily (although not exclusively) from one source, but it is a source that represents the modern scholarly consensus. To be a violation of NPOV, there would need to be an alternative POV that should be given due weight, but is not. Agricolae (talk) 15:20, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the NPOV tag. The discussion above does not name any specific instance of an NPOV violation in this article. To put the tag back, a specific example of a problematic passage should be provided. --Akhilleus (talk) 14:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Geat is not mentioned in Anglian Collection V Lindsey. The list ends with Godulf Geoting and no Geat is mentioned. Frank Stenton also says Five names of god in the list on page 127 of the online version of the book. An alternative, offline version has been suggested to say Six names on page 137, but in this case, I suggest we should go for the readable, and hence more reliable, online version. If there is a typo, we should go with the latest version, which is mine, presumably corrected and published in 1970, as a pose to the 1969 version that you are using. 1969 was a big year. Lots of changes. 6 kings presumably became 5 as the church lost it's grip on the information and the sources got less biased analysis.

This reading of 5 can be clearly demonstrated as an error to be attributed to the offline content through comparison of the actual data as provided by the full names can be found in the authentic versions in Vespasian B VI, Tiberius A. VI and B. I, Parker version, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge 183 and Anglo-Saxon chronicle.Source Chambers, R. W., Beowulf, p. 200, Cambridge University Press, 1959

Richard North also exposes that the original text with brackets, he reads Geot(ing) at position number 5, as Godulf(ing)'s father in his list on page 134 of this book

North says "When the West Saxons transcribed Geot as WS Geat, this figure took up a standard position in their royal genealogy". He is arguing here that the Anglo-Saxons adapted the Geot mentioned in Vespasian Lindsey into Geat as part of "politically motivated attempts to connect the Anglo-Saxon kings with the Goths and Lombards." He even notes that the Historia Brittonum presents Geta as "the son of god (fuit, ut aiunt, filius dei), although it is also made clear that Geta was not thereby God of gods, 'but one of their idols which they themselves used to worship' (sed unis est ab idolis eorum, quod ipsi colebant). Asser states Geata whom the pagans quite recently worshipped as a god", making this alternate name also worthy of mention as the historical source name.

Now I know I've lost some other sources along with recent deletion discussions, but here's a new one on the topic, highlighting the invention of Geat as part of biased propoganda on the part of the Anglo-Saxon kings trying to imitate the gothic roots being claimed by the Carolingian dynasty.

This scholarly, recent, comprehensive, Cambridge University source also notes the five ancestors added to the genealogies around 892 in the ASC; Scyld, Scef, Beaw, Heremond and Hwala. He gives the suggestion of Scyld being related to Danish Scydlings, which is equally as valid a statement to be covered as the selective concentration on Geat, and this one particular spelling of his name.

As responsible historical encyclopedia editors, we should be analysing sources with exceptional scrutiny to pick up on POV and factually wayward arguments and I suggest work is done on this page to accommodate a comprehensive view of the data. A good encyclopedia should give full coverage, accurate reflection of historical sources as per WP:COMMONNAME (with alternates if notable), and awareness of bias and notable arguments about it. As far as I can see, we are currently simply reflecting and promulgating the heavily Christian-biased POV and specific fantasy of some dark-age King. Until this is resolved, I would re-request the NPOV and disputed tags replaced on this article for the reasons mentioned. Paul Bedson ❉ talk ❉ 16:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 * No, actually we shouldn't, because as responsible editors, we should recognize that we do not have the expertise to do this. It should be left to those who are experts, and we should synthesize their opinions.  Of course, even this is problematic when an editor is unable to understand the writings of these scholars.  Agricolae (talk) 17:50, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Robert Gordon Latham
I would like to argue for the inclusion in this article of the following piece of text about Robert Gordon Latham's discussion about the philology of the patronymic usage of the -ing ending of the original names of these ancestors. It was involved in the recent Godulf Geoting deleted article, but did not form part of it when it was deleted and was not discussed. This information is of highly notable importance for everyone living in Britain in a city or town with a name that has "ing" as a composite part, from Birmingham to Nottingham, Huntingdon to Uffington and onwards even to Buckingham Palace. It also adds another source accurately recording Godwulf as the last fully named ancestor in these lines according to original sources:

Goeting
Robert Gordon Latham, in a study of philology notes that the use of the "-ing" ending of the Anglo-Saxon patronymic is similar to the Ancient Greek "ίδης". Speaking of the use of this type of surname, he says "In the Bible-translation the son of Elisha is called Elising. In the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle occur such genealogies as the following: —

Ida wæs Sopping, Eoppa Esing, Esa Inging, Inga Angenviting, Angenvit Alocing, Aloe Beonocing, Beonoc Branding, Brand Baldaging, Baldag Vodening, Voden Friowulfing, Friowulf Finning, Finn Godwulfing, Godwulf Geating = Ida was the son of Eoppa, Eoppa of Esa, Esa of Inga, Inga of Angenvit, Angenvit of Aloe, Aloe of Beonoc, Beonoc of Brand, Brand of Bseldseg, Baeldaeg of Woden, Woden of Fridowulf, Fridowulf of Finn, Finn of Godwulf, Godwulf of Geat."

 * As was discussed in the first article into which it was placed, this summary of Latham adds nothing of value. Oh, and Latham explicitly gives Geat as one of the names, the earliest, appearing in this text. To claim otherwise and even want to use this source that indicates the opposite of what is it supposed to prove only serves to reinforce the problem from the start.Agricolae (talk) 17:53, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

 * He notes it as the patronymic of Godulf, not explicitly as a name. He doesn't give Geata's patronymic name as he does Godulf, indicating Godulf is the end of the list. How can the origins of the name of so many notable place names not be of value? How is that judged? Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 20:00, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with Agricolae; there's no reason to add this material. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Well I think it is important for my fellow countrymen, even if you don't think so. Perhaps it is better placed elsewhere if you don't want it here though. How about on the Legendary progenitor page that I am about to expand? I think that's the perfect place to go do some work with all this information and get this section improved correctly. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 20:06, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Paul, there's no particular reason to add the material to legendary progenitor, either. Please stop trying to shoehorn this stuff into whatever article strikes your fancy; it's no fun having to play whack-a-mole. --Akhilleus (talk) 20:17, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There have been other names for this game you speak of. Surely every mole just needs to find the right hole, sorry if mine might have been invading other people's recently. That page is surely the appropriate place for comprehensive discussions about legendary progenitors and legendary genealogies of all peoples. Sorry if you don't like it, but I will try to keep the game interesting and sensible for you, and in the right hole! Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 20:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Legendary founder
I suggest the replacement of this text with legendary progenitor because founder is innaccurate terminology. Founder is more applicable to an organization or structure. It is also more singular in form than alternatives. In ancestry, the suggestion of having lots of founders of a dynasty is not expressed well here. In English, we have a wider vocabulary with better words such as ancestor or progenitor of a royal family. There can however be many legendary progenitors, which has plurality implied and is a viable alternate word for Ancestor, as is founder in most modern Thesauruses that you could look into.

As for terminology used in sources, we shouldn't be violating copyright and copying every word per se where better alternatives are available. D.G. Scragg uses this word to note Scef as a progenitor of Aethelwulf in Aethelweard's Chronicon, if you want to check. Scef is referenced in the article.

Using good vocabulary gives Wikipedia greater breadth and depth, and extends links to other pages otherwise orphaned, all core values not to be disregarded. Paul Bedson ❉ talk ❉ 00:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * I can't help but notice that the change you're proposing allows you to link to an article where you've included material that's been rejected here. Whack-a-mole seems like the right label, all right.

 * Oh, and I see no reason to change from "founder" to "progenitor". Your concern about copyright is specious, your appeal to "good vocabulary" silly—"legendary founder" is perfectly good vocabulary, and perhaps even better when dealing with the sort of pedigree that is interested in a line of direct male descent. Certainly many scholars have no hesitation referring to the founders of dynasties, so neither should we—especially when the editor proposing the change seems to have hidden motives behind the shift in terminology. --Akhilleus (talk) 01:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * In the article it doesn't read "legendary founder" it reads "legendary founders", which is silly, and bad english. Please read the article on plural for further detais. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 02:00, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * This is good English, you're not reading it properly. The sentence begins "These trace each royal family from legendary founders..." Multiple families, each with a legendary founder, means that there are legendary founders. It's easy to rephrase to "These trace each royal family from a legendary founder..."

 * Telling me to "read the article on plural for further detais" is unnecessarily snarky, as well as bad spelling. I understand what a plural is, perhaps better than you. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:07, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * It is more complex than it is being portrayed - some of the families do indeed have more than one legendary founder (sources conflict). That being said, legendary progenitor is not an appropriate substitute.  That article is explicit in saying it refers to the legendary ancestor of an ethnic group or tribe, not of a family, so it doesn't apply here. Agricolae (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Not really, I think it's simple and I am not sure why you don't want to expand Wikipedia correctly. Here is a reference that shows both are used, but in this form obeys the laws of plurality. In various Greek myths, Melampus is the "legendary founder and progenitor of a great and long-continued family of prophets". You can't say "These trace each royal family from legendary founders, and on to Woden", because this implies multiple founders of the royal family and There can be only one; Woden, who is mentioned in the sentence and is recorded as such in the majority of sources. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 03:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Woden wasn't a founder of anything. Agricolae (talk) 04:04, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * If Paul continues to make personal attacks I think the next stop is ANI, and I've told him that. Dougweller (talk) 10:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no personal attack, I am just wondering why we can't wikilink appropriate alternate words and requesting further explanation of an apparent breach of Manual of Style/Linking guidelines, where it says "Linking through hyperlinks is an important feature of Wikipedia. Internal links bind the project together into an interconnected whole. Interwiki links bind the project to sister projects such as Wikisource, Wiktionary, and Wikipedia in other languages; and external links bind Wikipedia to the external World Wide Web." That's all. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 15:55, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Paul, people may have little patience with you and call 'personal attack' where none was intended, but there is a reason for this. The reason is that you test people's nerves by being completely unreasonable and wasting everybody's time for no other reason than your own lack of knowledge and/or common sense.
 * In the article it doesn't read "legendary founder" it reads "legendary founders", which is silly, and bad english. Please read the article on plural for further detais.

If the author of such a comment is any older than 14 years of age, it is completely unacceptable and childish behavior. It they are 14 or younger, they should invest their time in trying to learn the basics from the people with tertiary education instead of annoying them. Enough said. --dab (𒁳) 11:33, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Point taken, but editing out the wikilink to Legendary progenitor in the first place is about the 14 year old mindset that I have to argue with sometimes. Won't let it happen again though. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 18:52, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Euhemerism section
Can people please try and resist the temptation to heap up material related to Woden? I know it is cool that the genealogies construct descent from Woden, and even an ancestry for Woden, but this is kind of a red herring. We have a full Woden article, and there you can go into as much detail as you like, but try to stick to a summary here.

Yes, this may continue an actual pagan tradition of deriving their leading families or kings from gods, you may mention this, but you should explore the topic at Germanic king (this may involve discussion of even the etymology of the word king itself). Conversely, the flipside of this is the swift "demotion" of Woden to a human ancestor after Christianization. There is a deep topic of the nature of "gods" in paganism here, but this is not the page to go into it. This page is supposed to be about the genealogies, to which the legendary bits are more or less just a preface. --dab (𒁳) 11:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I entirely agree. Mostly because I suggest Wihtlaeg was Ataulf and we should concentrate on him. Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 18:55, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Paul, unless you have a reliable source that says Wihtlaeg may have been the same person as Ataulf, this is the sort of original research that the RfC/U was commenting on. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I have an "amateur" history book by a notable author; Bo Gabriel Montgomery, Royal Houses an Ancient Migrations which suggests it, I know this can't be used in articles, but it isn't original research and I think a fair discussion point in context of Woden-concentricity.  Paul Bedson  ❉ talk ❉ 16:51, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

 * I am not entirely following DBachmann here, but if it is being suggested that the part on the ancestry of Woden go elsewhere, I couldn't disagree more. As indicated, this is about the pedigrees and not Woden, but it is about the construction of the entire pedigree and not just the part back to Woden.  It is not as if there was an existing pedigree for Woden that was just linked into by the Anglo-Saxon pedigree makers.  They invented links to Woden and then (it would seem) went ahead and invented a pedigree for him too, as part of the same process of progressive extension of the royal pedigrees. A division before and after Woden is nothing more than a convenient divide in a discussion of the overall development of the full genealogical tradition, and not somehow removed from it (and best to be removed from it).  I also think a discussion of the manuscripts that provide this material is as important as discussing the motivations (the Euhemerism section should complement the Documentary tradition section, not replace it).  I am also going to modify the statement that it all derives from Bede.  While Bede is our earliest source, we know there were people keeping such records in his time (because he refers to them) so it is far from clear that the later pedigree makers designed their framework entirely from his writings. Agricolae (talk) 18:08, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

 * I disagree and oppose. We need to handle the Old English Woden-related genealogy stuff here. We do not even need a separate article for Woden from Odin. I am currently preparing a rewrite to replace the big mess we currently have on our hands and the last thing we need is more arbitrary, pointless splintering into yet more poor articles. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:10, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are planning on making major changes, perhaps a discussion first would be good, as it is unclear that everyone with an interest in this article has the same concept of what it should be. Agricolae (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I should have been more clear. I didn't mean that I am preparing a rewrite for this article, but rather a long coming rewrite of the Odin article and its satellites. You can see it in progress here. :bloodofox: (talk) 23:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the clarification - I wasn't sure which you were talking about, and as I am intending some rewriting here I didn't want us to be setting out in different directions. Agricolae (talk) 00:03, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Dismissed by scholars
This was fact tagged last year and removed today. It's obviously the case and is discussed in the article. I reinserted it. Another source is The Wiley Blackwell Encyclopedia of Anglo-Saxon England By Michael Lapidge, John Blair, Simon Keynes, Donald Scrag. Dougweller (talk) 20:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Recent edits
A thesis/dissertation from 1939 isn't exactly going to trump a 1953 journal article. But the 1953 article isn't a really strong source either. This isn't my field - what's the current scholarship looking like? Either way - the proper way to approach this is ... someone was bold, they were reverted, now we discuss with sources. And hopefully we can find recent scholarship on the disputed text. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:41, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Anglo-Saxon royal genealogies


text:
Talk:David Barnes (footballer)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on David Barnes (footballer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203042157/http://www.coludata.co.uk/player.asp?pid=582 to http://coludata.co.uk/player.asp?pid=582
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120811142334/http://www.coludata.co.uk/matchdetails.asp?mid=2740 to http://coludata.co.uk/matchdetails.asp?mid=2740
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120804060506/http://www.coludata.co.uk/matchdetails.asp?mid=2768 to http://coludata.co.uk/matchdetails.asp?mid=2768

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:37, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:David Barnes (footballer)


text:
Cookbook:Roasted Brined Turkey I

| Cuisine of the United States

Ingredients

 * ½ US gallon (8 cups) water
 * 2 cups (600 g / 1.3 lb) salt
 * ½ cup (85 g / 3 oz) firmly packed light brown sugar
 * 2 tbsp peppercorns
 * 2 US gallons (7.6 L / 32 cups) of ice water (50% ice)
 * 16 - 18 lb turkey
 * 2 tbsp (½ stick) unsalted butter

Brining

 * 1) Combine the ½ gallon water, salt, brown sugar, and peppercorns. Bring to a boil and cook about 3 minutes until everything is dissolved.
 * 2) Transfer the brine to a 5-US-gallon (19 L) bucket, and stir in the ice water.
 * 3) Remove the neck and giblets from turkey, and place the turkey in the bucket of brine. If the brine won't cover turkey, add a little more water.
 * 4) Chill the turkey in the brine for 6–24 hours.

Roasting

 * 1) Preheat the oven to 500°F (260°C), and move a rack to the lowest level of the oven. You'll drop the temperature later, but start it hot to get a crispier, more flavorful skin. The effect will be to keep the fat from melting and rolling down the side of the turkey, which is only going to dry it out.
 * 2) Place the turkey drumstick side-down on a roasting tray (with slots to allow drippings through into a pan), or on a rack sitting in a pan.
 * 3) Attach the wings to the bird by imagining you were twisting someone's arm behind their back. Do this with both wings. Once you figure out the right twist, you'll find that the tips of the wings will stay firmly in place near the center of the back of the turkey (near its backbone).
 * 4) Coat the turkey skin with the butter.
 * 5) Place the turkey in the preheated oven, and roast for about 30 minutes.
 * 6) Remove turkey from oven, and put a tent of aluminum foil loosely over the breast—this is going to keep the breast meat from overcooking and drying out.
 * 7) Reduce the heat to 350°F (176.7°C), and return the turkey to the oven.
 * 8) Continue roasting the turkey for about about 2¾–3 hours for the 16–18 pound (7–8 kg) bird, periodically basting it and checking the internal temperature with an instant-read probe thermometer. The breast must reach a minimum of 161°F (71.67°C) before removing it from the oven. The thigh will ideally be around 180°F (82.2°C) at this point.
 * 9) Remove turkey from the oven, and let stand for 15–20 minutes before carving.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * This recipe is for a 16 - 18 lb turkey. Roughly 2 days are required to prepare the turkey. The first day is for preparations and for brining, and the second day is for cooking the turkey.
 * The tricky thing about cooking poultry is that the dark meat needs to be about 15° hotter than the white meat. White meat is safe to eat at 165°F (73.9°C), which is the temperature at which salmonella instantly dies, though 12 minutes at 140°F (60°C) will also kill it—odds are fairly good that you'll kill it all on the way to 165°F (73.9°C). The problem is that dark meat isn't very good at 165°F (73.9°C). Further complicating this is that if the breast meat gets to the 180°F (82.2°C) that the dark meat wants to be cooked to, it's going to be dry, flavorless, and generally unpleasant.
 * For optimum safety and uniform doneness, it is recommended to cook stuffing outside the bird.

title: Cookbook:Roasted Brined Turkey I


text:
Mocis dyndima

Mocis dyndima is a species of moth of the family Erebidae. It is found in Belize, Costa Rica, Venezuela and Colombia.

title: Mocis dyndima


text:
Shobana Vignesh

Dr Shobana Vignesh is an Indian classical and devotional vocalist and a former actor. She is known as 'Mahanadhi' Shobana from her role in the film Mahanadhi.

Early life
Shobhana was born in Kumbakonam in Tamil Nadu to N. Kumar and Revathi Kumar and raised in Chennai. Her maternal family has worked to preserve the Bhagavata Mela tradition in the Village of Tepperumalnallur in Tamil Nadu.

Shobhana attended the Padma Seshadri School in Chennai.

Carnatic vocalist
Shobhana started training in Carnatic music at a very young age. She has been trained by Sri. P.S. Narayanaswamy, Prof. T.R. Subramaniam and Sri. Swamimalai Janakiraman.

Shobhana regularly performs during the Chennai December music season at concerts and on television. She regularly performs at ‘Narada Gana Sabha’, ‘Sri Krishna Gana Sabha’, ‘Sri Thyaga Brahma Gana Sabha’, ‘Bharat Kalachar’, ‘Chennayil Thiruvayaru’, and ‘Margazhi Mahotsavam,’ she makes an annual pilgrimage to Saint Thyaragaraja's Samadhi at Thiruvaiyaru and participates in the Thyagaraja Aradhana festival.

Shobhana has performed throughout India, the United States, Singapore, Malaysia, Dubai, Mauritius and Sri Lanka. She is often featured by leading Television channels in India and other countries and has been performing concerts for the past two decades.

Education

 * PhD in Music, Mother Teresa Women's University, India, 2011(Highly Commended Thesis)
 * M Phil in Music, Mother Teresa Women's University (Highly Commended Thesis)
 * Masters in Music, University of Madras, India
 * M.A Mass Communication & Journalism, Alagappa University, India
 * B.A Music, University of Madras
 * 8th Grade in Theory of Western Classical Music, Trinity College Of Music, London
 * 6th Grade in Practical Solo Piano, Trinity College of Music

Albums
Shobhana made her recording debut in ‘Mahanadhi.’ She released her first solo album at age 12 and has since then released more than 150 albums ranging over 1,500 songs by the time she became a teenager.

Shobhana has recorded albums in Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Kannada, Sanskrit, Braj, Marathi, Hindi, English and Baduga. She was nominated for the Global Indian Music Awards, Mumbai in 2010 for her album, ‘Shobana Live in Concert – Bharat Kalachar’.

Playback singer
Shobhana has sung in movies including Mahanadhi (Tamil), Mahanadhi (Telugu), Aravindan, Punniyavathi, Kannedhire Thondrinaal, Azhagana Natgal, and Kanave Kalaiyadhe.

Awards

 * Received Tamil Nadu Kalaimamani award in August 2019.
 * Received ‘ISAI SELVAM’ title from Muthamizh Peravai in May 2015.
 * Received 'TAMIL ISAI PEROLI' title from the New York Tamil Sangam in April 2014.
 * Received 'ISAI ARASI' title from the Trinity Arts Festival of India in December 2013.
 * Received 'TAMIZHISAI VANI' from Greater Atlanta Tamil Sangam in May 2011.
 * Received the 'INDIVIDUAL ARTIST AWARD' from the Maryland State Arts Council, USA for 2010.
 * Chosen as the 'YOUNG ACHIEVER' in the field of Carnatic music by the India Today magazine in 2007.
 * Awarded the 'YUVA KALA BHARATHI' title by Bharat Kalachar in 2003.
 * Received the 'YOUNG ACHIEVER OF THE YEAR 2002' award from The Cosmopolitan club of Madras.
 * Awarded the fellowship for 'OUTSTANDING YOUNG ARTISTE' by the Department of Culture, Government of India from 2003 to 2005.
 * Awarded the title of PANNISAI ARASI by Thamizh Isai Sangam, Thiruvaiyaru in 1997.
 * Was conferred the title of EZHIL ISAI VANI by Vani Vilas Sabha, Kumbakonam in 1996.

Concerts for charity

 * Fund raising concert for free eye camps conducted by Arvind Eye Hospital, India,
 * Concerts for the Tamil Nadu Foundation across the United States.
 * Fund raising concert for the EWRF (Educational, Welfare and Research Foundation) as part of the No Student Left behind campaign (NSLB), Malaysia.
 * Performance for the relief of Tsunami victims at Chennai, India.
 * Concert at the Music Academy for the Cancer Institute, Chennai.
 * Performance for an AIDS Awareness album
 * Charity concert at Malaysia for the welfare of spastic children and many such events.
 * Songs for raising knowledge of legal rights, women's rights and government legal help. She was honored for these services by the State Legal Services Authority on Indian Independence day 2003.

title: Shobana Vignesh


text:
Talk:Ray Burse

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ray Burse. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081003113914/http://usl1.uslsoccer.com/home/253971.html to http://usl1.uslsoccer.com/home/253971.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110312035510/http://concacaf.globalsportsmedia.com/page.php?sport=soccer&language_id=us&page=tournament&view=match&match_id=1048894 to http://concacaf.globalsportsmedia.com/page.php?sport=soccer&language_id=us&page=tournament&view=match&match_id=1048894

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:23, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ray Burse


text:
Talk:Diane English

inaccuracy
Her father's name was Richard English.

Get your facts straight —Preceding unsigned comment added by <IP_ADDRESS> (talk) 23:02, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Diane English


text:
User:Paufder

Thank you for visiting my page. I'm Patricia Aufderheide, University Professor in the School of Communication at American University in Washington, D.C., and founder of the Center for Media and Social Impact, originally the Center for Social Media, there. I'm interested in the creative process, democratic expression, and how both are shaped by policies ranging from media ownership to copyright. I follow with great interest how storytellers use the audio-visual form to tell stories that help us understand the world and our place in it better.

title: User:Paufder