Article: Vijayakumar
Kavitha Vijayakumar (Sister)Dr Anitha Vijayakumar (Sister)Vanitha Vijayakumar (Half-sister)Preetha Vijayakumar (Half-sister)Sridevi Vijaykumar (Half-sister)Manjula Vijayakumar (Step-mother)
Arun Vijay (born 19 November 1977) is an Indian actor, playback singer and stunt coordinator. He is the only son of veteran film actor Vijayakumar and has been active in the Tamil film industry since 1995. An adventurous person by nature, he has his license to skydive from the United States Parachute Association.
Early life and family
Arun Vijay was born into a film family as the only son to actor Vijayakumar and his first wife Muthukannu. He has two elder sisters Kavitha, who has acted in a single film, Coolie, and Anitha. Arun Vijay's step mother is actress Manjula Vijayakumar, who played lead roles in over 100 films in the 1970s, while his half-sisters Vanitha, Preetha and Sridevi have also appeared in several films.
In 2006, Arun Vijay married Aarthi, daughter of film producer Dr. N. S. Mohan and a post-graduate in Psychology, with whom he has a daughter, Purvi and a son, Arnav Vijay. In 2010, Kavitha's daughter Hasini married N. S. Mohan's son Hemanth, who is a co-producer of Feather Touch Entertainments and has also acted alongside Arun Vijay in Malai Malai.
Career
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Take extra care to use high-quality sources. Material about living persons should not be added when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism.
Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see this page.
Acting
ArunVijay signed on for an A. R. Rahman musical titled Love Story to be his acting debut, but the delay of that project meant that he accepted Anbalaya Films' offer of Sundar C's Murai Mappillai (1995). In October 2006 he had changed his name from Arunkumar to Arun Vijay , hoping that a new name would bring better luck for him.
In 2009, Arun Vijay opted against starring in low budget films and opted to collaborate with his father-in-law's production house Feather Touch Entertainment for his future projects. The first venture, Malai Malai directed by A. Venkatesh, became a commercial success. While the next film, Maanja Velu (2010) by the same team, was also a success. He then appeared in Magizh Thirumeni's action-thriller, Thadaiyara Thaakka (2012), marking a move away from his previous two masala films. The film, which featured Mamta Mohandas alongside Arun Vijay, became a super hit. After Thadaiyara Thaakka Arun starred in Yennai Arindhaal. He played the role of Victor, an antagonist in the film. Arun's performance had an overwhelming response from the audience. He was well appreciated for his dedication and hard work. The same year, he debuted in Telugu through the film Bruce Lee – The Fighter as the lead antagonist. The actor has completed his fourth successive film under the Feather Touch Entertainment banner, Vaa Deal co-starring Karthika Nair. He also made his Kannada debut as the lead antagonist through the movie Chakravyuha in 2016. Vaa Deal would be releasing on September 2nd 2016.
Production
On September 1st 2015 Arun launched his own production company In Cinemas Entertainment (ICE). Arun had said that he had launched this company to identify and provide an opportunity to ambitious and talented youngsters. Arun's first production venture would be Kuttram 23 which will be a medical crime thriller directed by Arivazhagan. Arun will be acting as a police officer for the first time in his career. Kuttram 23 would be Arun's 23rd film in his career.
Filmography Actor
Year Title Role LanguageNotes1995 Murai Mappillai Raja Tamil Filmfare Award for Best Male Debut – South1996 Priyam Arimath Tamil 1997 Kathirunda Kadhal Mayilsamy Tamil Ganga Gowri Shiva Tamil 1998 Thulli Thirintha Kalam Ashok Tamil 2000 Kannaal Pesavaa Arun Tamil Anbudan Sathya Tamil 2001 Pandavar Bhoomi Tamizharasan Tamil 2002 Mutham Bharath Tamil 2003 Iyarkai Mukundan Tamil 2004 Jananam Surya Tamil 2006 Azhagai Irukkirai Bayamai Irukkirathu Prem Tamil 2007 Thavam Subramaniam Tamil 2008 Vedha Vijay Tamil 2009 Malai Malai Vetrivel Tamil 2010 Thunichal Shiva Tamil Maanja Velu Velu Tamil 2012 Thadaiyara Thaakka Selva Tamil 2015 Yennai Arindhaal Victor Manohar Tamil Edison Award for Best VillainSIIMA Award for Best Actor in a Negative RoleNominared, Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actor – TamilBruce Lee Deepak Raj Telugu 2016 Chakravyuha Omkar Kannada Vaa Deal Vetrivel Tamil to be released soon Kuttram 23 Vetrimaaran Tamil Filming
Singer
Year Film Song Composer Notes 2012 Thadaiyara Thaakka "Poondamalli Thaan" Thaman Sung only hummings
References |
Source: Fragments from a Writing Desk
"That truth should be silent I had almost forgot"--Enobarbus in ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA, back in Rome after having been too long in Egypt.---------
Melville's PIERRE, Book 4, chapter 5: "Something ever comes of all persistent inquiry; we are not so continually curious for nothing."
Monday, July 28, 2014
The Genealogy of the SLO Bureaucrat Who Tried to Deny Me Social Security in 1998
On 20 August 1998 I went into San Luis Obispo to apply for my Social Security retirement. The woman in charge let me know that she knew everything, but
everything
about me, including how little I had made as an apprentice telegrapher on the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe in 1952. She grilled me on what I would be working on. A book, I explained, a biography of the writer Herman Melville. Would I make money from that book? Well, yes, Ma'am, I hope so, although you never know what agenda-driven reviewers will do to sales. Sorry, she said, if you are going to be making money from working you can't apply for Social Security. Manning up, I stood tall and said, "Woman, I will walk on the beach for a year if I have to, but you WILL sign me up for my Social Security."
"Sick,"
I wrote in my diary,
"sick from shock that they could try to deny me benefits--'self-employed' indeed. I would never write another word rather than lose my benefits after quitting my job. . . . Very stressful."
I got that woman's name and now have traced her genealogy. I have traced 16 of her [male] GGG Grandparents and 32 of the [male] GGGG Grandparents and have found that all of them, without exception, were bureaucrats in charge of looking over Revolutionary War pension applications under the Law of 1832 and finding frivolous reasons for denying benefits to the aged vets, for of course only the aged vets were still surviving. In the 97 cases I have examined so far, the most outrageous one was the denial of benefits to Patrick McElyea S2789 on the grounds that he had claimed to be "in the battle of Alamance near the line of Guilford County North Carolina in which he lost his horse, saddle & bridle,"--this when the Battle of Alamance was fought in 1771 and there was no such battle in the Revolution. There was of course such a battle in which Patrick lost his horse, saddle, and bridle. But look at the money the bureaucrat saved and look at the actuarial tables for the chances that Patrick McElyea would live long enough to get word of his rejection and to get strength to reapply.
It is singular that so many of the SLO Bureaucrat's ancestors all but monopolized the pension-rebuffing system in several Southern states.
I wonder if she is on Social Security now or if she has moral scruples about collecting, as some Revolutionary veterans had turned Friends and refused to apply for their pensions.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 9:19 PM 1 comment: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Zarko on Top Villains in the Duke Lacrosse Hoax--Brodhead at #15--
http://falserapearchives.blogspot.com/2011/04/top-villains-in-duke-lacrosse-hoax-by.html
Top Villains in the Duke Lacrosse Hoax by Zarko
It was not necessarily easy to pick a list of the top 15
greatest villains in that disaster of a Hoax. Some are sharing a spot in this list,
as they are often difficult to tell apart in their nonsensical screed. The
hatred the people on this list displayed for justice, freedom, and other
traditional democratic values is astounding. Their methods of perpetrating
injustice at any cost, including self-deprecation, is a testament to how far we
still have to go before we can truly make a great society.
I have excluded the two principal villains, District Attorney Mike Nifong and
the False Rape Accuser herself, the Hoax Enabler, Crystal Gail Mangum from this
list, as they were clearly the #1 and #2 criminals otherwise. . . .
#15: Richard Brodhead, Wahneema Lubiano, Karla
Holloway, Peter Wood, Maurice Wallace, Thavolia Glymph, and the rest of the
Group of 88
There are more 88ers coming lower in the count, but these are the people I
couldn't fit in this list.
The Group of 88 are 88 Duke professors with a chip on their shoulders, an
irrelevancy complex, and an almost obsessive hatred of a large variety of
things, often male and white. The lacrosse team provided a very easy platform
from which to launch their views.
The original "Listening" ad and Wanted Poster provided enough fuel
for the fire of hatred to last a long time. Under the guise of 'anonymous'
students, the 88ers provided their own quotes damning the team. Lubiano even
characterized it as a stake through the heart of the Lacrosse team.
Of course, when the case collapsed and the 88ers were (slightly) taken aback,
they would no longer claim the ad was about the Lacrosse incident, but about other,
more 'lofty' goals, such as speaking out against the sexism and racism on
campus.
Facts, of course, were stubborn things, ignored exclusively by most people on
this list.
One note however, is the signatory Arlie Peters. He distanced himself from the
G88 and did not sign the clarifying statement later on. For that, he needs to
be applauded. The rest continued their hatred long after the case they once so
cherished... collapsed so utterly.
For a list of their behavior, google.com, KC Johnson and others provide ample
information.
Finally, the president of Duke, Richard Brodhead. He was not an 88er, but he
certainly shares their views. Many people attest to his intelligence, and I
have no reason to doubt any of them. He is a very smart, suave man, with a
great eloquence, which is clearly lacking in most of the company he keeps (on
this list and the 88ers in general).
When Finnerty and Seligmann were arrested, he gave his speech of: "If they
did it, it's appalling. If they didn't do it, whatever they did is bad
enough".
He knew, at that point, that all Seligmann and Finnerty did was drink beer.
According to Brodhead, that was enough to warrant a 30 year prison sentence.
He failed his university, he failed his institution, he failed academia in
general, and he failed to reign in a mob of morally destitute gangsters.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 12:23 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Cousin Lois Gore: In the South if you are Not Kin you are Connected
Well, Larry Burford, who recently established the power of Stewart DNA uniting us, mentioned that his wife is a Balentine. I notified my Balentine first cousin (daughter of a Costner and a great granddaughter of Nancy Ann Stewart Costner) and after a couple of exchanges it turns out that she is more kin to Larry's wife than she is to Larry. I am temporarily left out of double kinship with Larry and his wife, but we have not compared names yet. No one argues with Triple Cousin Lois.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 11:41 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Maureen Dowd and Killer Lightning on Venice Beach
Do words have consequences?
Did Maureen Dowd's relentless mockery of Al Gore affect even a few hundred voters in Florida?
Did those old folks worried about saffron-robed figures in temples give the election to George Bush?
Did Maureen Dowd give us an inattentive President in August 2001 and then give us the Iraq War?
Did Maureen Dowd give us accelerated Global Warming?
Do words have consequences?
Sometimes I wish things had been different.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 7:38 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Friday, July 25, 2014
Maurice and Heddy
Too many of our friends are dead.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 9:52 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Pyles, and the Psychotic David Fanning, after Yorktown
Because some of my ancestors pursued the infamous Colonel Fanning through several North Carolina counties I have been trying to find who served with them. As always when you work with documents (pension applications transcribed mainly by the ineffable Will Graves and Leon Harris) you resist by-paths if you can. Yet I cannot ignore Dr. John Pyle Sr or Dr. John Pyle Jr after learning that the young doctor's wife was my Aunt Sarah Brashear. Philip Higdon calls young Dr. Pyle the "major." And apparently it was not a hand or part of a hand but an eye the major lost at the Hacking Party held by the father of Robert E. Lee, for another applicant says that in the 1820s he saw the young doctor, no longer young but still one-eyed, in Illinois. Poor Uncle John, fleeing his shame! First he went with a troop of Tory Brashears in a mass migration to Greenville, SC, accompanied by my highly patriotic Grandfather Ezekiel Henderson and his bride, Elizabeth, Sarah's sister, then went on to Kentucky and Illinois. One son tried to erase the shame of being the son and grandson of Tory Pyles by rushing to enlist when the War of 1812 broke out. What did Ezekiel think and what did he say? And to name a son Brasher! That's all a by-path.
I am looking at the slaughter David Fanning carried out after Yorktown, when North Carolina might have settled down to reconciliation and reconstruction, you would have thought. William Ryan (transcriber Leon Harris--who after years of polite emailing turns out to be a Cockerham cousin of mine!) says it clearly:
"The Tories under Col Fanning and other tory leaders seemed to be driven to despair by the surrender of Cornwallis They divided themselves into small parties and prowled about the country & sought every opportunity to commit the most cruel and unprovoked murders & so frequent were murders robberies & Arsons committed by them that the Counties of Guilford Randolph & Chatham were in a state of continual alarm throughout the fall and winter of 1781 & the spring & summer of 1782--and the tories did not give up the control until the British wholly evacuated South Carolina."
Characteristically, after his retreat to Nova Scotia Fanning raped a female child, was convicted, and got away without punishment. The Single Most Evil Tory in the Revolution? Are there other candidates?
Back to looking at what the aged vets say about Fanning.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 8:14 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Larry Burford and Hershel Parker--and the Power of Stewart DNA
Oddities of DNA. Larry Burford (my sixth cousin two times removed) got a 95% match with me and a 20% match with a much closer cousin. We are wondering if there is something especially powerful about Stewart DNA.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 6:19 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
Hershel Parker and Colin Dewey 22 July 2014 after Global Warming Takes Over the Central Coast
Posted by Hershel Parker at 8:25 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
"Kathleen Stewart Longhurst" --Stewart Cousins are Hoping to Get in Touch with You
Kathleen, I hope you can get in touch with me at argulusezekiel@gmail.com
One of our Stewart cousins has information to share with you.
Or you could comment here where I can read it but not necessarily make it public.
Thanks! Posted by Hershel Parker at 9:24 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Colin Dewey and his Turk's Head Braiding
Posted by Hershel Parker at 9:12 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Monday, July 21, 2014
James Alexander Bell and 2 Bearded Stewart [?] Men
Are there any Mississippi Stewarts out there who can identify the seated man and the full bearded man on the right? Could they be Dougherty cousins?
Posted by Hershel Parker at 5:48 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Sunday, July 20, 2014
Lighted Fishing Boats in Morro Bay after Sunset 20 July 2014
Posted by Hershel Parker at 9:37 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
Saturday, July 19, 2014
More on Mark Wylie''s Amazon review of William D. Cohan's THE PRICE OF SILENCE
More on Mark Wylie''s Amazon review of William D. Cohan's THE PRICE OF SILENCE
Your post :
Jul 13, 2014 2:06:37 PM PDT
Hershel Parker says:
Weeks have passed and I am moved to make another comment. This is
the rare sort of review that makes the reputation of the writer, if the
writer is young in the profession, as I think Mr. Wylie is. Nothing
published on Cohan's book in any magazine or newspaper compares with
this Amazon review in sweep and quality. Rabinowitz's review is more
historically important simply because it was published in the WALL
STREET JOURNAL and repudiates an earlier puff review in the same
newspaper, but Wylie's review surpasses every other in scope, detail,
and rigorous application of high intelligence. With this review Wylie
exalts Amazon's progress as a great honest democratic reviewing site.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 6:25 PM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
On Re-writing History -- Wikipedia Discussion: "Talk: Cathy Davidson"
I just said that KC Johnson's blog Durham-in-Wonderland was an amazing performance of [writing] history on the fly, taking the phrasing from Stuart Taylor's calling LieStoppers an amazing performance of journalism on the fly. Writing history is much harder, and KC Johnson has been writing history, day by day for 8 years. This Wikipedia discussion is about Re-Writing History.
Talk:Cathy Davidson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article must adhere to the
biographies of living persons
policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material
about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is
unsourced or poorly sourced
must be removed immediately
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous
. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard
. If you are connected to one of the subjects of this article and need help, please see
this page . Biography portal
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Biography ,
a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's
articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion
. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation . Start
This article has been rated as
Start-Class on the project's quality scale .
This article is supported by
the science and academia work group
.
It is requested that a photograph or picture of this person be
included
in this article to improve its quality.
Note:
Wikipedia's non-free content use policy
almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional
photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely
show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a
free licensed
photo (for example, during a public appearance), or
obtaining a free content release of an existing photo
instead. The
Free Image Search Tool
may be able to locate suitable images on
Flickr
and other web sites.
An appropriate infobox
may need to be added to this article. Please refer to the
list of biography infoboxes
for further information. Chicago portal
This article is within the scope of
WikiProject Chicago
, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to
Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area . Start
This article has been rated as
Start-Class on the project's quality scale . ???
This article has not yet received a rating on the project's
importance scale .
This article has been
automatically rated by a bot
or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the
|auto= parameter. Lacrosse case
I've restored the section on the Lacrosse case/ad issue. Before
re-removing, please state why it isn't notable. I do realize that, in
general, BLP prescribes that potentially damaging claims be referenced,
but considering it included a link directly to the article that had the
reference anyway, a simple 'fact' tag likely would have sufficed. Either
way, it's a moot point now. I just copied the reference from the other
article. 72.88.52.136 ( talk
) 08:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
It was originally challenged as not factual because there isn't any
citation that Cathy Davidson was one of the signatories. After spending
some time researching the issue, it seems that the original ad (
http://web.archive.org/web/20070227145449/http://listening.nfshost.com/listening.htm )
does not "attack the players" or "prejudge" their guilt or innocence.
The ad seems to be a compilation of student comment about racism and
sexism at the time of the
Duke Lacrosse Rape Case
. I further researched for any substantiation on the "
Group of 88 "
and couldn't find anything outside of the Wikipedia entry about it. The
entry mainly quotes articles about the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, which
has its own wikipedia entry, and the works of KC Johnson. There was
quite a controversy over the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, and all political
statements at the time received quite a bit of press hype. But, it seems
that this section is an unsubstantiated and sensationalist claim, that
can, at best, be considered an argument held by a minority group. Given
that this is a BLP, wikipedia editors must err on the side of caution.
There are several tags that could have worked here - WP: UNSOURCED, WP:
VALID, WP: UNDUE, WP: NPOV, WP: WELLKNOWN. It just seemed like the
simplest tag was that it was unsourced.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.43.222 ( talk
) 22:05, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
Erm... actually...
First, you seem to be making a personal judgement over whether or
not the ad really was fair. Besides being Original Research, it's
entirely beside the point. Reliable sources have decided that it's
noteworthy, as is membership in the so-called 'Group of 88'.
(That said,
"These students are shouting and whispering
about what happened to this young woman
..."
pretty much discards any notion of not pre-judging)
If you feel that the 'Group of 88' itself is non-notable, then you
should probably address that at the appropriate article, rather than
here; since that would be the central point to debate it. However, I'm
not sure what you mean when you claim to be unable to find any other
substantiation of the Group of 88 outside of Wikipedia. It's
It is easy
to find references to the Group of 88. So, it was certainly a
documented and notable term, irrespective of judgement over their
actions.
If you're referring to proof that she was a member of it, there are a
couple of links across the articles to lists of signatories.
If you think it's undue weight by virtue of size, then try to
refactor it. If you think it's undue in the sense of irrelevant to her,
well, in addition to adding her name to the ad voluntarily, she's since
explicitly commented
on the whole affair. So,
she
certainly felt that her involvement in the ad was notable.
I'm not sure what this 'minority group' argument is about. You need to be more specific if you're going to
blank an entire section
.
I'm restoring for now because your personal Original Research isn't a
valid argument, and notability has been more than established.
Everything's sourced. So, even if it isn't written
well , it
certainly doesn't meet any threshold that would warrant entire
section-blanking. If you wish to rewrite it, do so (while still
preserving relevant facts). However, there's already clearly more than
enough evidence that outright blanking isn't warranted.
72.88.63.188 ( talk
) 19:01, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Let me try to be clearer about my concerns. According to
WP: BLPDEL ,
"Summary deletion is appropriate when the page contains unsourced
negative material or is written non-neutrally, and when this cannot
readily be rewritten or restored to an earlier version of an acceptable
standard." When you first restored it on Feb 17, it had been removed
(not by me) because the sources did not link Cathy Davidson to the
'Group of 88'. I understand you have found two sources to provide that
link. So, it's not entirely unsourced. But, it is written in a
non-neutral, negative way. The flags on this subject, going back a
couple years indicate that it cannot be restored to a previously
acceptable version. I also don't see a way to edit the section to
provide a balanced view without making it even longer than it is now.
As it is, the subject is already given undue weight. According to
WP: UNDUE ,
"Giving due weight and avoiding giving undue weight means that articles
should not give minority views as much of, or as detailed a description
as more widely held views.... Discussion of isolated events, criticism
or news reports about a subject may be verifiable and impartial, but
still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article
topic." This topic of the article is Cathy Davidson. The accomplishments
listed in her career section are quite short entries. For instance, she
co-founded HASTAC ,
which has been around for 10 years and has 10,000 members. That ten
years has one sentence in this wikipedia article about Cathy Davidson.
The section on the Duke Lacrosse controversy, which concerns one
advertisement and one statement by Cathy Davidson in 2006, is four
sentences long, and has its own section.
I hate to further bog us down in discussion of citations, but most of the citations here aren't reliable sources.
WP: SOURCES
says to "Base articles on reliable, third-party, published sources with
a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.... The best sources have a
professional structure in place for checking or analyzing facts, legal
issues, evidence, and arguments. The greater the degree of scrutiny
given to these issues, the more reliable the source." And, according to
WP: BLPREMOVE ,
wikipedia users are supposed to "remove immediately any contentious
material about a living person that is unsourced or poorly sourced."
These are the citations currently in use:
1. Johnson, KC. "
Source Notes for Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustice of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case
"
Retrieved on 27 July 2012. - There is no description on this webpage
that actual says it's "source notes" for KC Johnson's book, and there's
no indication that this list was actually published.
2.
The Johnsville News: Duke Case: The 'listening' statement. Johnsville.blogspot.com
(2006-11-10). Retrieved on 2012-04-20. - This is a blog post without a
declared author, which doesn't qualify as a reliable source in wiki's
policy.
3. Bauerlein, Mark. (2010-05-26)
The Group of 88 Is Doing Just Fine – Brainstorm – The Chronicle of Higher Education. Chronicle.com.
Retrieved on 2012-04-20. - While this is on the Chronicle's website, it
is a blog post, with the comment next to it that: "Posts on Brainstorm
present the views of their authors. They do not represent the position
of the editors, nor does posting here imply any endorsement by The
Chronicle."
The two additional citations you gave are: 4.
Whatever Happened to the Group of 88?
- This is an "essay" posted as part of Minding the Campus online
magazine, but there's no description of the editing or fact-checking
process that happens to their "essays." It looks quite a lot like a
personal blog post to me.
5.
"Group of 88" faculty hears criticism in the wake of lax scandal
- This does cite a published news article. It gives a much more
balanced account, though, including comments about how "the
advertisement's content has been widely misinterpreted." Then, we've
looped back around to the section being written in a biased and negative
way.
Any of these three reasons is sufficient to blank the whole section,
especially because this is a BLP. I'm not trying to be abrasive by
quoting the wikipedia policies, but my references to the tags wasn't
providing enough context to explain the reasons why this section should
be blanked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.43.222 ( talk
) 23:17, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it needs a rewrite, but, in the meantime...
"...when this cannot readily be rewritten or restored to an earlier version of an acceptable standard."
pretty much guarantees that blanking was the wrong course of action. I
know your heart's in the right place, but the action was certainly
wrong.
I'd also say that it does need to still be included because (as our
friend has pointed out on the BLP page) it's not only documented, but
also addressed by Davidson herself.
I tried taking a look, and I don't have it
quite
figured out yet. My closest rewrite is,
During
the 2006 Duke University lacrosse case, she was one[12] of the
so-called Group of 88 professors who, shortly after members of the
university's lacrosse team were accused of rape, signed a controversial
letter thanking protesters for "making a collective noise" on "what
happened to this young woman."[13] After a year-long ordeal, the
lacrosse players were found innocent of the rape charges.
To be honest, it has a bit of a 'whitewash' feel to it, though, because it takes out
all
notion of prejudging, which "what happened to this young woman"
certainly does. It wouldn't be hard to find a citation pointing out the
prejudging, but the other IP thus far has only found Ann Coulter, right?
Technically valid, but I think I'll borrow his/her 'shudder' on that
one. Still, other than that one aspect, what do either/both of you
think? (Additionally, since that'd make it shorter, I'm not sure that
the section header would really be necessary, but first-things-first,
n'est-ce pas?) 139.57.240.18 ( talk
) 04:12, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
A wiki administrator blanked it on Dec 20, so I still don't think it
was out of line to take it down, especially if the section needed this
much attention. Also, Cathy Davidson has an active
blog and there are lists of articles
by her. If we included everything she'd commented on once, her page would be tremendously long!
If we're considering rewriting, I found a few citations that would be helpful: 1. Text of the paid advertisement:
http://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/pdf/socialdisasterad.pdf
2. Text of Cathy Davidson's commentary:
http://truthaboutkcjohnson.wordpress.com/2007/12/17/in-the-aftermath-of-a-social-disaster/
(the Raleigh News & Observer archived article is linked off of this page:
http://today.duke.edu/showcase/mmedia/features/lacrosse_incident/oprelated_archive.html
, but the link doesn't seem to work) 3. Another blog post for the list of signatories -
http://www.concerneddukefaculty.org
- It shows 89, rather than the notes of KC Johnson that gives 88. I
know there's some controversy over this, but this was the most reputable
list I could find, and it's still only a blog post.
Here's my try at a rewrite (that represents both Cathy Davidson's and
the critics' viewpoints on the issue): In 2006, Cathy Davidson was one
of 88 or 89 signatories (cite one of the blog posts?) of an
advertisement in the Duke Chronicle
that begins by saying that the faculty are "listening to our
students....the Durham community, the Duke staff, and to each other"
about "the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be the
objects of racism and sexism" (
cite ) during the Duke Lacrosse Case .
Some later interpreted the statement "what happened to this young
woman" in the advertisement as a presumption of guilt in the case. (
cite )
In an article in the Raleigh News and Observer, Davidson stated that
"the ad we signed explicitly was not addressed to the police
investigation or the rape allegations. The ad focused on racial and
gender attitudes all too evident in the weeks after March 13. It decried
prejudice and inequality in the society at large: 'It isn’t just Duke,
it isn’t everybody, and it isn’t just individuals making this disaster,'
the ad insisted." (
cite
) I still think this is giving undue weight to the issue (
WP:UNDUE
), given that there is one sentence about her 10-year involvement with a 10,000-member organisation.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.43.222 ( talk
) 17:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
No, there are no WP:BLP issues here and it most decidedly is not WP:UNDUE. It is more likely a case of
buyer's remorse
on the part of
Cathy Davidson
. I intend to re-add the information to the article. Ms. Davidson, I am
sure, made a very calculated decision to add her name to the list, and
to write the subsequent "commentary" on a case that received extensive
national attention. I find it very odd that one IP editor wrote that if
we "included everything she'd commented on once, her page would be
tremendously long!". But then we aren't, are we, just those that have
garnered national attention, and that's hardly undue, is it?
Hammersbach ( talk
) 02:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
The lacrosse controversy passage was resolved as
WP:UNDUE on the Noticeboard ( Archive171
) in March 2013. I'm removing the section again.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.96.130.201 ( talk
) 15:49, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Please re-read the applicable section on the Noticeboard. You’ll see
that the lacrosse controversy passage was “resolved as WP:UNDUE” as one
of the commenting editors (the only registered editor) found the
comments to be “clear cases of copy-paste based on negative/controversy
blog sources which do not mention any of the living subjects at hand.”
That is hardly the case with the edit that I have made and in fact, I am
providing a direct quote from Ms. Davidson.
Hammersbach ( talk
) 16:34, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
No, the section was immediately removed because of "the clear cases
of copy-paste" but that comment goes on to say "Any hands and eyes as to
sourcing and WP:WEIGHT will be appreciated.". It was agreed that a
section like this violated
WP:WEIGHT
and that same editor earlier stated "I'll give the IP a moment to
remove these sections. I will curtail them myself if they remain."
Helpsome ( talk
) 12:11, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
No, I have reviewed this talk page and the applicable section on the
Noticeboard and I am unable to find anywhere that “It was agreed that a
section like this violated WP:WEIGHT…” I would like to point out that
the sentence you quote, "Any hands and eyes as to sourcing and WP:WEIGHT
will be appreciated", does not imply closure, rather that the editor is
clearly asking for assistance. Additionally, it should be noted that
this comment was made in reference to the articles on Houston Baker and
Anne Allison, not Cathy Davidson. However, the main objection from that
editor, correctly in my opinion, is that the passages in questions are
“based on negative/controversy blog sources which do not mention any of
the living subjects at hand.” That is distinctly not the case with the
edit I made. I have used none of the offending blog sources. My edit is
balanced, properly sourced and, as I noted above, I am providing a
direct quote from Ms. Davidson on the subject. As such, I am restoring
the edit. Hammersbach ( talk
) 16:19, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I would like to assume good faith but it is impossible to come to
the conclusion that you have by reading that noticeboard. Literally
everyone except
the person adding that information agreed that it violated
WP:WEIGHT
. There isn't a single comment against that consensus
except
the IP adding the information. You are adding information that violates
WP:WEIGHT
and doing so in direct opposition to everyone else who has commented on this issue. Please stop POV pushing.
Helpsome ( talk
) 19:06, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
┌ ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── ┘
So, I am "POV pushing"... hmmm... let's take a look! The first thing we
should note is that the previous editor points to the quote on the
Noticeboard, "Any hands and eyes as to sourcing and WP:WEIGHT will be
appreciated." and then declares that it "was agreed that a section like
this violated WP:WEIGHT". When I tried to point out that the phrase
"will be appreciated" clearly is a request for assistance, not a
statement of closure, I was informed that it is "impossible" to come to
that conclusion, and this can only mean one thing; that I don't
understand the future tense of the King's English, so... push, push,
push! The second thing we should note is the mathematical fact
promulgated by the previous editor that "Literally everyone
except
the person adding that information agreed that it violated WP:WEIGHT. There isn't a single comment against that consensus
except
the IP adding the information." Yut, that's right, I must confess that
there was literally only one IP editor who disagreed on the Noticeboard.
Now the fact that there was only a grand total of
just three editors
to comment doesn't matter. The plain fact of the matter is that the
third editor made the definitive difference and sealed the ironclad
"consensus" on this weighty matter. For me to disagree in any way with
this well established consensus is, well... push, push, push! The third
thing we should note is that the edit that I have made is distinctly
different from the edit that is being discussed on this talk page and on
the Noticeboard. The one that is being discussed is a “clear case(s) of
copy-paste based on negative/controversy blog sources which do not
mention any of the living subjects at hand” while mine is a properly
sourced and balanced edit and which directly quotes Ms. Davidson, but
apparently that doesn't matter so... push, push, push!
...sigh...
Whether or not the previous editor chooses to assume good faith on my
part or not troubles me not at all. The bare fact of the matter is that
Ms. Davidson choose to insert herself, through the media, as a member
of a group and as an individual, into a controversy that had gained
national and international attention. I have attempted to add this fact
in a neutral, balanced, and impartial way, and one that is completely
different from the previous version. If my edit has violated WP:Weight
then I would like to know specifically how. As it stands right now, I
find the accusation that I am "POV pushing" to be
inaccurate . Hammersbach ( talk
) 01:09, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Conflict of interest violations
I thought it was suspicious how there was no mention of Davidson's role in the
Group of 88
in this article so decided to examine the various IPs who have all been so firmly against such inclusion.
152.3.43.222
made quite a few Davidson related edits accords Wikipedia. While some
were uncontroversial, at least 6 significant edits were made opposing
the Duke Lacrosse scandal material in 2013, either posting here and on
noticeboards or simply removing engaging in wholesale removal of the
content. While the initial version of text added did have some minor
sourcing issues it's extremely clear that the material in question is
highly notable and not UNDUE in the slights as was incorrectly being
argued. Perhaps most worrying of all was that
the IP also opposed inclusion of any such mention of the group of 88 controversy for any of Davidson's colleagues
either, some of whom played even more significant roles in the Group of
88 than she did. A WHOIS check of the IP shows it to be from Duke
University, who were Davidson's employer at the time.
On 1st of July 2014 a second IP
146.96.130.201
started editing the page, their very first contribution being the
removal of the Duke lacrosse material (despite the sourcing now being
improved). The IP is question belongs to Graduate Center of the City
University of New York and Davidson started work there on the 1st July
2014 (her husband also moved from Duke to CUNY at the same time). The
CUNY edits, reasoning, style and knowledge of the issues appear
remarkably similar to the Duke IP, therefore suggesting it may be the
same editor who used both IPs. Term dates show the final examinations
were on May 18th and the next semester begins on August 28th
[1]
, meaning there are few students around thus significantly increasing the likelihood that the edit was made by a staff member.
As far as I'm aware, neither of these two IPs disclosed their
WP:COI
on any of the issues at any time. I've now tagged the IPs and reminded
them about our policies on this matter. The various comments above and
elsewhere by the IP should therefore be viewed in the context of the
conflict of interest of the author, and I'd ask them to be a little more
honest about this in future please.
Update - some further "interesting" edits from a different Duke IP
[2] [3] -- Shakehandsman ( talk
) 16:02, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
I note the account
User:Nigel Pap
was registered within an hour of my posting of the above revelations.
Nigel has almost exclusively made posts in support of removing Group of
88 material, in a manner quite similar to the COI IPs and also appears
to have a similar level of familiarity with Wikipedia policies and
proceedures.-- Shakehandsman ( talk
) 17:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
I have no affiliation with with Duke University, CUNY, any of the professors in the
Group of 88
, or anyone else involved in the
Duke lacrosse case .
I have no conflict of interest. The fact that I registered shortly
after these comments were posted is a coincidence. Although there
may
be a connection between the IPs listed by Shakehandsman, I see no
reason to assume that they are Cathy Davidson herself or that they have a
conflict of interest. Nigel Pap ( talk
) 19:31, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
You clearly misunderstand our polices here. It's reasonably certain
that the two IPs are related, but even that doesn't matter so much.
We've proved beyond any doubt that they both belong to institutions that
employed Davidson at the time of the edits by the IPs. For those
affiliated with Duke and CUNY to be removing Group of 88 material
represents a blatant breach of our COI guidelines. If it's not Davidson
making these edits then its likely to be one of her colleagues (possibly
another member of the 88?) or perhaps one of her students and none of
these things are allowed. It wasn't so terrible the first time when the
sourcing/prose was less than perfect, but the most recent edits in
particular really do not seem motivated by a wish to improve the
article. Anyway. please read up on our COI guidelines, it's important
that editors understand them. I should also note that none of those IP
editors have reappearance since Nigel joined us here, and while that
proves nothing in itself, is it a little strange on top of everything
else-- Shakehandsman ( talk
) 20:58, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
It would be reasonable to expect that students or educators at Duke
(or other institutions) would be especially interested in this issue.
There is no conflict of interest simply because the IP is associated
with Duke. Nigel Pap ( talk
) 22:28, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes there is. Any person seeking to gain a qualification from Duke
has an interest in the reputation of the institution and that reputation
is damaged by the scandal (particularly for any of the departments
strongly associated with the 88). Very few of the 88 lost their jobs as a
result of their actions, and most seem to still be there today so its
not as if we're taking about ancient history or simply the actions of
former long-gone staff. Now there's nothing wrong with these COI editors
engaging in this discussion, though of course they should declare their
COI first, the real problem is the censorship of group of 88 material
by these COI editors/editor--
Shakehandsman ( talk
) 22:48, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
For what it is worth, this comment thread has received notice at KC Johnson's "Durham-in-Wonderland" blog.
http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-group-of-88-wikipedia.html John Pack Lambert ( talk
) 02:41, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I see they now both work at CUNY so it's quite brave a of him to do that.--
Shakehandsman ( talk
) 03:17, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Posted by Hershel Parker at 7:43 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest
This is a tribute to KC Johnson, Who For 8 Years Wrote History on the Fly
I quote the tribute while reminding everyone that KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor, Jr., are the authors of the definitive book on the 2006 Duke false-accusation case, UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT. What an extraordinary achievement KC's blog (DURHAM-IN-WONDERLAND) was, for 8 years, and now will be available as an archive, I trust.
http://www.cotwa.info/2014/07/farewell-to-most-important-blog-ever.html
Friday, July 18, 2014
Farewell to the most important blog ever for the wrongly accused
Durham
in Wonderland, Professor KC Johnson's hugely influential blog that
chronicled the Duke lacrosse false rape case starting more than eight
years ago, has completed its mission, and Prof. Johnson has posted his
"closing comments." At its height, the blog had in excess of 100,000
readers per day.
For me, KC Johnson is the greatest blogger ever.
How
influential was this blog in helping to draw attention to the
injustices in Durham? After the three young lacrosse players were
declared "innocent" by the state's attorney general amid a media circus
usually reserved for the rich and the famous, one of the young men,
Reade Seligmann, issued a statement in which, among other things, he
thanked Professor Johnson for his efforts.
It was Durham-in-Wonderland that inspired me to start this blog.
Ground-zero
in the Duke cesspool that Johnson chronicled were, of course,
ex-district attorney Mike Nifong and Duke's infamous "Group of 88," the
Duke faculty activists who exploited the young men's distress to advance
their extremist ideologies. For those not familiar with the Group of
88, Johnson gives us a summary in his closing post:
. . . for
dozens of Duke faculty, [the] evidence appeared irrelevant. Eighty-eight
of them rushed to judgment, signing a statement (whose production
violated Duke regulations in multiple ways) affirming that something had
“happened” to false accuser Crystal Mangum, and thanking protesters
(“for not waiting”) who had, among other things, urged the castration of
the lacrosse captains and blanketed the campus with “wanted” posters.
As the case to which they attached their public reputations imploded,
Group members doubled down, with most issuing a second statement
promising they would never apologize for their actions. (Only three
Group members ever said they were sorry for signing the statement, and
two of that number subsequently retracted those apologies.) For months,
the Duke administration was either in agreement with the faculty
extremists or cowed by them—or some combination of both.
Johnson's
blog was as distressing as it was illuminating. It ripped off a scab to
reveal an ugly, progressive pus that animates policy-making on campus,
especially on issues of gender and race. It also exposed the news
media's fealty to political correctness in its largely biased reporting
of the incident.
Professor Johnson is a frequent contributor to Minding the Campus, and readers are urged to follow him there.
We
must pause to add a chilling footnote. Despite the atrocity of Duke
lacrosse and many, many other cases in the years since, the academy has
grown ever more hostile to due process and fairness when it comes to
presumptively innocent young men accused of sexual assault. Prof. Dan
Subotnik, for one, openly wondered if the Duke players would "have had
any chance of justice" after the Department of Education's "Dear
Colleague" letter? The persons who drafted that letter should have been
required to read Durham in Wonderland.
On behalf of the community of the wrongly accused, we salute KC Johnson for his unstinting work to advance the cause of justice.
Posted by Hershel Parker at 6:46 AM No comments: Email This BlogThis! Share to Twitter Share to Facebook Share to Pinterest Newer Posts Older Posts Home Subscribe to: Posts (Atom) Search This Blog Total Pageviews Followers Blog Archive ► 2024 (13) ► March (10) ► January (3) ► 2023 (143) ► December (11) ► November (10) ► October (9) ► September (13) ► August (4) ► July (4) ► June (15) ► May (5) ► April (6) ► March (11) ► February (22) ► January (33) ► 2022 (335) ► December (24) ► November (22) ► October (24) ► September (25) ► August (33) ► July (31) ► June (41) ► May (29) ► April (30) ► March (24) ► February (25) ► January (27) ► 2021 (336) ► December (32) ► November (29) ► October (22) ► September (36) ► August (26) ► July (26) ► June (18) ► May (13) ► April (36) ► March (24) ► February (27) ► January (47) ► 2020 (496) ► December (22) ► November (23) ► October (24) ► September (19) ► August (42) ► July (45) ► June (28) ► May (20) ► April (49) ► March (81) ► February (73) ► January (70) ► 2019 (697) ► December (69) ► November (59) ► October (63) ► September (63) ► August (63) ► July (73) ► June (26) ► May (52) ► April (48) ► March (44) ► February (63) ► January (74) ► 2018 (810) ► December (79) ► November (47) ► October (70) ► September (82) ► August (78) ► July (63) ► June (81) ► May (75) ► April (70) ► March (51) ► February (32) ► January (82) ► 2017 (762) ► December (61) ► November (77) ► October (73) ► September (56) ► August (55) ► July (63) ► June (65) ► May (81) ► April (54) ► March (56) ► February (54) ► January (67) ► 2016 (466) ► December (17) ► November (27) ► October (12) ► September (26) ► August (37) ► July (67) ► June (60) ► May (36) ► April (82) ► March (39) ► February (36) ► January (27) ► 2015 (582) ► December (40) ► November (37) ► October (60) ► September (118) ► August (52) ► July (27) ► June (41) ► May (72) ► April (38) ► March (23) ► February (40) ► January (34) ▼ 2014 (311) ► December (23) ► November (22) ► October (22) ► September (15) ► August (25) ▼ July (27)
The Genealogy of the SLO Bureaucrat Who Tried to ...
Zarko on Top Villains in the Duke Lacrosse Hoax--B...
Cousin Lois Gore: In the South if you are Not Kin ...
Maureen Dowd and Killer Lightning on Venice Beach
Maurice and Heddy
Pyles, and the Psychotic David Fanning, after York...
Larry Burford and Hershel Parker--and the Power of...
Hershel Parker and Colin Dewey 22 July 2014 after ...
"Kathleen Stewart Longhurst" --Stewart Cousins are...
Colin Dewey and his Turk's Head Braiding
James Alexander Bell and 2 Bearded Stewart [?] Men
Lighted Fishing Boats in Morro Bay after Sunset 20...
More on Mark Wylie''s Amazon review of William D. ...
On Re-writing History -- Wikipedia Discussion: "Ta...
This is a tribute to KC Johnson, Who For 8 Years W...
"The Tryon County Patriots of 1775 and Their 'Asso...
KC Johnson on Re-Writing History for Duke Gang of 88
Crystal Mangum, Richard Brodhead, and Lawsuits
Men on Beach maybe early 1930s
Meta Carpenter and Hershel Parker October 1978
Carvel Collins and Hershel Parker October 1978
Powerful Sentence in a Local Obituary
Scalini Guarding the South Battlement
Jeanne Phillips ("Dear Abby") Singlehandedly Destr...
James Jack's Affidavit in his 88th Year
The Mecklenburg Declaration of Independence
A Schlemp Cousin Who Got To Meet John Buchan
► June (34) ► May (47) ► April (27) ► March (26) ► February (17) ► January (26) ► 2013 (358) ► December (25) ► November (16) ► October (30) ► September (67) ► August (39) ► July (24) ► June (35) ► May (23) ► April (23) ► March (11) ► February (22) ► January (43) ► 2012 (462) ► December (21) ► November (41) ► October (39) ► September (77) ► August (48) ► July (34) ► June (22) ► May (73) ► April (13) ► March (23) ► February (39) ► January (32) ► 2011 (651) ► December (33) ► November (22) ► October (23) ► September (7) ► August (17) ► July (29) ► June (89) ► May (100) ► April (177) ► March (110) ► February (26) ► January (18) About Me Hershel Parker
Hershel Parker is the author of the 1997 Pulitzer finalist, Herman Melville: A Biography, 1819-1851 (Johns Hopkins, 1996) and Herman Melville: A Biography, 1851-1891 (Johns Hopkins, 2002). Each volume won the top award from the Association of American Publishers. Parker’s 1984 Flawed Texts and Verbal Icons: Literary Authority in American Fiction brought biographical evidence to bear on textual theory, literary criticism, and literary theory. Parker and the team of now mature Hayford students are finishing the final volume of the Northwestern-Newberry Edition. Robert Sandberg is helping with the layout and design of three print volumes of The New Melville Log. Parker in late 2013 is at work on Ornery People: What Was a Depression Okie?, a book about his white and red American ancestors. Parker's Melville Biography: An Inside Narrative was put on the NEW YORKER blog as one of the Books to Watch Out for in January ("Parker writes with a rare combination of humor and passion"). On 30-31 March 2013 the WALL STREET JOURNAL gave a page and a third to Carl Rollyson's review of MELVILLE BIOGRAPHY as "a superb contribution to a fledgling field: the study of the writing of literary lives."
View my complete profile
Popular Posts
John B. E. Glenn's Mexican War discharge paper. Notice his height!
Me and Liz Warren: From the Washington POST blog
Hershel Parker 7:22 AM PDT I am a blue-eyed Okie, looking more Scots and German than Indian, but I have Choctaw and Cherokee...
Rough Draft of the Introduction to The New Melville Log
3-23 July 2010 Jay Leyda's two-volume The Melville Log: A Documentary Life of Herman Melville, 1819-1891 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1...
(no title)
2010 Translation of READING "BILLY BUDD" by Ernst Chantelau
"Richard H. Brodhead: Troth and Consequences"
I am reposting this from Sunday, March 13, 2011 because of Judge Beaty's decision this week to let the charges of "obstruction of j...
Pride--Pride in Will Graves's citing me in a Footnote in Southern Campaign Revolutionary War Pension Statements and Rosters
Some of you know I have been working part time for years on ORNERY PEOPLE: WHAT WAS A DEPRESSION OKIE? You know that Will Graves with the ...
Morro Rock--No one worried about Forest Fires
Morro Rock from a Mile North, 8:30 am
Scalini, shell shocked from bombs last night
Pages Home Popular Posts
John B. E. Glenn's Mexican War discharge paper. Notice his height!
Me and Liz Warren: From the Washington POST blog
Hershel Parker 7:22 AM PDT I am a blue-eyed Okie, looking more Scots and German than Indian, but I have Choctaw and Cherokee...
Rough Draft of the Introduction to The New Melville Log
3-23 July 2010 Jay Leyda's two-volume The Melville Log: A Documentary Life of Herman Melville, 1819-1891 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1...
(no title)
2010 Translation of READING "BILLY BUDD" by Ernst Chantelau
"Richard H. Brodhead: Troth and Consequences"
I am reposting this from Sunday, March 13, 2011 because of Judge Beaty's decision this week to let the charges of "obstruction of j...
Pride--Pride in Will Graves's citing me in a Footnote in Southern Campaign Revolutionary War Pension Statements and Rosters
Some of you know I have been working part time for years on ORNERY PEOPLE: WHAT WAS A DEPRESSION OKIE? You know that Will Graves with the ...
Morro Rock--No one worried about Forest Fires
Morro Rock from a Mile North, 8:30 am
Scalini, shell shocked from bombs last night
Popular Posts
John B. E. Glenn's Mexican War discharge paper. Notice his height!
Me and Liz Warren: From the Washington POST blog
Hershel Parker 7:22 AM PDT I am a blue-eyed Okie, looking more Scots and German than Indian, but I have Choctaw and Cherokee...
Rough Draft of the Introduction to The New Melville Log
3-23 July 2010 Jay Leyda's two-volume The Melville Log: A Documentary Life of Herman Melville, 1819-1891 (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1...
(no title)
2010 Translation of READING "BILLY BUDD" by Ernst Chantelau
"Richard H. Brodhead: Troth and Consequences"
I am reposting this from Sunday, March 13, 2011 because of Judge Beaty's decision this week to let the charges of "obstruction of j...
Pride--Pride in Will Graves's citing me in a Footnote in Southern Campaign Revolutionary War Pension Statements and Rosters
Some of you know I have been working part time for years on ORNERY PEOPLE: WHAT WAS A DEPRESSION OKIE? You know that Will Graves with the ...
Morro Rock--No one worried about Forest Fires
Morro Rock from a Mile North, 8:30 am
Scalini, shell shocked from bombs last night
Simple theme. Theme images by
luoman . Powered by Blogger . |