 |
All article submissions on this archive page have been mass moderated, and none of the remaining submissions are suitable for articles on Wikipedia. The page has been mass moderated and can safely be marked as completed. |
Please now follow the link back to Wikipedia:Articles for creation.
37 Woods Edge Ct
edit
|
|---|
Sourceseditthis would be my house
the best place in stafford
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Today, Sigma Psi Kappa is locally seen as such an organization. More than 70 women of been inducted, and the ideals that the founding sisters strived toward are the same ideals our sisters strive toward today. Sigma Psi Kappa is known for hosting 2 blood drives each semester, doing well in school, being active in our campus community, and are seen as leaders at New Jersey Institute of Technology. Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Lord Henry is the mentor of Dorian Gray in Oscar Wilde's A Picture of Dorian Gray. Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Chestnut Hill Academy
edit
|
|---|
The school is accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. External linkedit
Category:High schools in Pennsylvania
Sourcesedit(See external link above for the school's official website)
68.162.80.7 02:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
"For Dummies" Books
edit
|
|---|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Rekoil (the band you cant stand)
edit
|
|---|
Sourceseditsources freewebs.com/rekoilthebandyoucantstand
myspace.com/rekoilthebandyoucantstand
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Max Shelton
edit
|
|---|
Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
 This request for creation has been declined. Please do not modify it.
|
|---|
|
This request for creation has been reviewed. The reviewer comments appear below the article text.
If you want to make changes and try again, copy and paste your article into a new submission and make your changes there. Ludo is a band from St. Louis, MO. They have two CDs: Ludo Broken Bride Sourcesedit[3]
216.147.225.76 04:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
copyvio removed, see http://www.kmlenation.com/pages/84299.php davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 02:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
O.S.D.L.
edit
|
|---|
O.S.D.L Is a clique with a variety of different street gangs put together.
O.S.D.L is spread out over several US cities, such as Chicago,Birmingham,Philedelphia,Atlanta,Miami,Jacksonvile,and much more.
As of now there is NO Latin Kings in O.S.D.L. Only Crip,Folk,MS-13,Vice lords,and Bloods.
And the colors you rep depend on what side you get down with. Like if you get down with the Crip side. You would rock Blue and Black.
The Symbol For O.S.D.L is thumb, pointer, and your pinky extended.
Also known as stoopid nawfside. It was originated in Atlanta,G.A.There are currently six kings
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
He started his musical career playing guitar in the alternative rock band Plaintiff, but the band later fell apart as their drummer and lead singer, Sam Broido began to focus his efforts on his other band, Ska Shank Redemption. He later joined bands which played music genres that were more suited to his tastes. These bands include Noise, a punk rock group, Hours Till Awesome, a pop group, and Hat and Tractor, his current band, which plays an eclectic blend of pop and rock in the vein of television sitcom theme songs. One of his current side projects is an unnamed David Bowie tribute band which includes former members of Hours Till Awesome and Lunchtime Policies. Falcon's most recent production, the Omnichord EP, consists of four songs played entirely on the omnichord. One song, which was entirely improvised, includes guest vocals by Falcon's childhood housekeeper, Thelma. As well as the guitar, Falcon plays the piano, omnichord and dulcimer. He is well versed on classical music theory, which is plainly evident in most of his work, but especially the songs he wrote for The Noise's debut album, The Larry LP. There is a band which was created entirely as a tribute to Falcon, The Falconers. Discographyedit
Production creditsedit
External linksedit
Sourcesedithttp://bryce-falcon.tripod.com/ - primary source besides personal knowledge http://www.myspace.com/somealians/ - secondary source
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Bryce Falcon is a legend across the world, and there is debate to whether he really exists or not. Known as Bryce Falcon by day and the better known "Blue Falcon" by night, it is rumored that Bryce is currently living in California and attending high school there. He has a mass cult following, with thousands visiting his Offical Website/Fanclub every day. Members of the club believe that Bryce is the equivalant to the second coming of the Christ, although members usually do not specify any religion preferring the ambiguous title of "a Falcon fan." MusiceditBryce is also a musician and has released his first studio album, titled "The Omnichord EP." Rumors stipulate that the original Omnichord EP emerged during the Preolithic Era and that this is just a re-release, but again this matter is seriously debatable. Other rumors dictate that Bryce was the mastermind behind the Beatles and the Ben Folds Five.
Sourceseditbryce-falcon.tripod.com 71.108.119.72 06:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
- REDIRECT Romain Rolland
24.34.35.245 05:55, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the suggestion. ×Meegs 15:04, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Avalanche Transceiver
edit
|
|---|
A radio transmitting/receiving device, usually strapped to a person's chest via a waist and shoulder strap, which continually transmits an emergency signal, that can be received by a another Avalanche Transceiver on the same radio frequency in the event of that person being trapped in an Avalanche. The device is normally worn by people in snowy areas where Avalanches pose a risk. The Avalanche Transceiver is left on transmit mode under the persons clothing (for protection) while the person is in the risk area, and will only switch to "receive" or "search" mode when looking for a lost person wearing a similar devise. Older analogue devises produce a louder noice (in receive mode) when the receiving unit gets closer to the transmitting unit and sometimes shows the direction of the signal. Newer digital transceivers show the distance using an LCD display as well as the direction. Both analogue and digital devises are cross compatible. These devises are often worn by Skiers, Cross Country Skiers, Snowboarders, Hikers, Climbers and Snowmobilers.
Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Sourceseditwww.3pic.com 218.101.84.246 08:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Hogwash
edit
|
|---|
A term normally used by old timers, it means stupid or even absolute rubbish. This has originated from Melbourne, Australia from the great man, Grandfather Jackson and it has since been spread to Perth by family members. When used in context you could say: "Mate that is absolute Hogwash you are talking bull dust"
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Adam Titchen
edit
|
|---|
Adam Titchen was born in Birmingham in 1990. He is the spitting image of a thousand bears, and his diet includes Five Eggs. He currently not lives in Shenstone. Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Steward Machine Company v. Davis 301 U.S. 548 (1937) was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the unemployment compensation provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935. The Act established a national taxing structure designed to induce states to adopt laws for funding and payment of unemployment compensation. The decision in Steward signaled the Court’s acceptance of a broad interpretation of Congressional power to influence state laws. The primary challenges to the Act were that it went beyond the powers granted to the federal government in the Constitution and that it involved coercion of the states in contravention of the Tenth Amendment—calling for a surrender by the states of powers essential to their quasi-sovereign existence. Background In the first months of 1937 the Court handed down decisions that affirmed both national and state prerogative to legislate regarding social welfare. The decisions were the first wave of what has become known as the constitutional revolution of 1937. There are three additional issues that set the stage in early 1937: 1. Use of the Spending Power of the national government to regulate commercial economic activity 2. Expansive view of general welfare 3. National economic conditions in the United States 1. Use of the Spending Power of the national government to regulate commercial economic activity By 1937 it had been well established that regulatory taxes controlling commercial economic actions were within the power of Congress. Hampton & Co. v. United States, 276 U.S. 394 (1928) held that a regulatory tax is valid even if the revenue purpose of the tax may be secondary. The Supreme Court had also held that a tax statute does not necessarily fail because it touches on activities which Congress might not otherwise regulate. Magnano Co. v. Hamilton, 292 U.S. 40 (1934): “From the beginning of our government, the courts have sustained taxes although imposed with the collateral intent of effecting ulterior ends which, considered apart, were beyond the constitutional power of the lawmakers to realize by legislation directly addressed to their accomplishment.” Further emphasizing the broad power of taxation, Sonzinsky v. United States, 300 U.S. 506 (1937) asserted that a tax does not cease to be valid merely because it regulates, discourages, or even definitely deters the activities taxed. In that case the Court held (regarding a tax on dealers in firearms): “We are not free to speculate as to the motives which moved Congress to impose it, or as to the extent to which it may operate to restrict the activities taxed. As it is not attended by an offensive regulation, and since it operates as a tax, it is within the national taxing power.” 2. Expansive view of general welfare The Supreme Court had recently decided U.S. v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1 (1936). The main point of that case was whether certain provisions of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 conflicted with the Constitution. In the Act, a tax was imposed on processors of farm products, the proceeds to be paid to farmers who would reduce their acreage and crops. The intent of the act was to increase the prices of certain farm products by decreasing the quantities produced. The Court held that the so-called tax was not a true one because the payments to farmers were coupled with unlawful and oppressive coercive contracts, and the proceeds were earmarked for the benefit of farmers complying with the prescribed conditions. Making the payment of a government subsidy to a farmer conditional on the reduction of his planned crops went beyond the powers of the national government. Specifically, the Court said: “The act invades the reserved rights of the states. It is a statutory plan to regulate and control agricultural production, a matter beyond the powers delegated to the federal government. The tax, the appropriation of the funds raised, and the direction for their disbursement, are but parts of the plan. They are but means to an unconstitutional end.” Although it struck down the Act, the Court dealt positively with expenditure of funds to advance the general welfare as specified in Article 1 § 8 of the Constitution. The Court stated that the issue “presents the great and the controlling question in the case.” After comparing expansive vs. restrictive interpretations of the Spending Clause, the Court adopted the philosophy that: “The clause confers a power separate and distinct from those later enumerated [,] is not restricted in meaning by the grant of them, and Congress consequently has a substantive power to tax and to appropriate, limited only by the requirement that it shall be exercised to provide for the general welfare of the United States. … It results that the power of Congress to authorize expenditure of public moneys for public purposes is not limited by the direct grants of legislative power found in the Constitution.” The idea that Congress has authority separate and distinct from powers granted by enumeration was (and still is) controversial. The fact that the Court struck down the Act despite an expansive interpretation of the Spending Clause reflects the turmoil in the Court’s thinking at this critical time. 3. National economic conditions in the United States The nation was in the midst of the Great Depression. In its Steward decision, the Court noted that: “During the years 1929 to 1936, when the country was passing through a cyclical depression, the number of the unemployed mounted to unprecedented heights. Often the average was more than 10 million; at times a peak was attained of 16 million or more.” Decision The unemployment compensation provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935 establishes a tax imposed on employers. However, provided that a state has established an approved unemployment compensation plan, the taxpayer is allowed to credit up to 90% of the federal tax paid to the state unemployment fund. In effect, the Act established a taxing structure designed to induce states to adopt consistent laws for funding and payment of unemployment compensation.
“The question is to be answered whether the expedient adopted has overlept the bounds of power. The assailants of the statute say that its dominant end and aim is to drive the state legislatures under the whip of economic pressure into the enactment of unemployment compensation laws at the bidding of the central government.” The key holding regarding the excise tax of the Act was: “The excise is not void as involving the coercion of the States in contravention of the Tenth Amendment or of restrictions implicit in our federal form of government.” An important part of the rationale was the ruling that even if the excise taxes: “were collected in the hope or expectation that some other and collateral good would be furthered as an incident, that, without more, would not make the act invalid. Sonzinsky v. United States, 300 U.S. 506. This indeed is hardly questioned.” The arguments placed the actions of Congress within its Constitutional power. The Court then established that the tax and the credit in combination are not weapons of coercion that would destroy or impair the autonomy of the states. The first step was: “To draw the line intelligently between duress and inducement there is need to remind ourselves of facts as to the problem of unemployment that are now matters of common knowledge.” After reviewing the distressed condition of the nation’s economy, the Court noted that: “The fact developed quickly that the states were unable to give the requisite relief. The problem had become national in area and dimensions. There was need of help from the nation if the people were not to starve. It is too late today for the argument to be heard with tolerance that, in a crisis so extreme, the use of the moneys of the nation to relieve the unemployed and their dependents is a use for any purpose narrower than the promotion of the general welfare. Cf. United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1.” Although not quoted specifically in Steward, the relevant aspect of Butler addressed the constitutional powers of Congress and established that Congress has a “separate and distinct” power to tax and spend that is “not limited by the direct grants of legislative power found in the Constitution.” Directly addressing the contention that the tax is coercive, Justice Cardozo wrote: “The difficulty with the petitioner's contention is that it confuses motive with coercion. “Every tax is in some measure regulatory. To some extent it interposes an economic impediment to the activity taxed as compared with others not taxed.” Sonzinsky v. United States. In like manner every rebate from a tax when conditioned upon conduct is in some measure a temptation. But to hold that motive or temptation is equivalent to coercion is to plunge the law in endless difficulties. ... Nothing in the case suggests the exertion of a power akin to undue influence … the ___location of the point at which pressure turns into compulsion, and ceases to be inducement, would be a question of degree.” An important issue in a tax not being coercive, satisfied in Steward, is that the conduct to be encouraged or induced accomplish a national end (general welfare) and be related to the tax itself. “It is one thing to impose a tax dependent upon the conduct of the taxpayers, or of the state in which they live, where the conduct to be stimulated or discouraged is unrelated to the fiscal need subserved by the tax in its normal operation, or to any other end legitimately national. … It is quite another thing to say that a tax will be abated upon the doing of an act that will satisfy the fiscal need, the tax and the alternative being approximate equivalents. In such circumstances, if in no others, inducement or persuasion does not go beyond the bounds of power.” And then, finally, Cardozo made explicit the liberty of the states to make agreements with Congress. “The states are at liberty, upon obtaining the consent of Congress, to make agreements with one another. … We find no room for doubt that they may do the like with Congress if the essence of their statehood is maintained without impairment.” Based on all the forgoing arguments, the final judgment was to affirm the lower Court’s decision upholding the constitutionality of the Act. The ruling upholding the act was one of two Social Security Cases that upheld elements of New Deal legislation in 1937. The Dissents The essence of the dissents was that the Social Security Act of 1935 went beyond the powers that were granted to the federal government in the Constitution. Imposing a tax that could be avoided only by contributing to a state unemployment compensation fund was effectively coercing each state to make law creating such a fund. Separate opinion of Mr. Justice McREYNOLDS. “That portion of the Social Security legislation here under consideration, I think, exceeds the power granted to Congress. It unduly interferes with the orderly government of the state by her own people and otherwise offends the Federal Constitution. .... [Article 1, Section 8] is not a substantive general power to provide for the welfare of the United States, but is a limitation on the grant of power to raise money by taxes, duties, and imposts. If it were otherwise, all the rest of the Constitution, consisting of carefully enumerated and cautiously guarded grants of specific powers, would have been useless, if not delusive.” Separate opinion of Mr. Justice SUTHERLAND (concurrence VAN DEVANTER). “The threat implicit in the present encroachment upon the administrative functions of the states is that greater encroachments, and encroachments upon other functions, will follow.” Mr. Justice BUTLER, dissenting. “… the statutory scheme is repugnant to the Tenth Amendment. … The Constitution grants to the United States no power to pay unemployed persons or to require the states to enact laws or to raise or disburse money for that purpose. The provisions in question, if not amounting to coercion in a legal sense, are manifestly designed and intended directly to affect state action in the respects specified. And, if valid as so employed, this 'tax and credit' device may be made effective to enable federal authorities to induce, if not indeed to compel, state enactments for any purpose within the realm of state power and generally to control state administration of state laws.” The dissenters are sometimes known collectively as the Four Horsemen, the consistently conservative members of the Court who opposed the New Deal agenda of President Franklin Roosevelt. Subsequent Jurisprudence Steward was part of a set of decisions in which the Court consistently upheld New Deal economic and regulatory legislation. Its key role was the expansion of Congressional authority to the regulation of state activity, and marked the end of Supreme Court attempts to limit Congressional power based on advancement of the general welfare. In fact, Butler, just the year before Steward, was the last case in which the Supreme Court struck down an Act of Congress as beyond the authority granted by the Spending Clause. Steward marked the beginning of the recognition that Congress could use the Spending Clause, under the umbrella of general welfare, to regulate state laws through incentives and encouragement—but not coercion. The national government may induce the states, or tempt them, or seduce them—but not coerce them into passing legislation considered desirable to meet national needs. Before Steward, Congress could regulate only commercial economic activity; after Steward, Congress could regulate the actions of state governments. It is now common for Congress to tie grants-in-aid with requirements and restrictions upon the states, although the practice is still often controversial. In a modern case depending upon the jurisprudence of Steward, the Court held in South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987) that Congress could influence states to raise the minimum drinking age to 21, by threatening to withhold funds for federal highways. In her dissent, Justice O'CONNOR stated: “When Congress appropriates money to build a highway, it is entitled to insist that the highway be a safe one. But it is not entitled to insist as a condition of the use of highway funds that the State impose or change regulations in other areas of the State's social and economic life .... Indeed, if the rule were otherwise, the Congress could effectively regulate almost any area of a State's social, political, or economic life.” And then later, approving of and quoting Butler: “If the spending power is to be limited only by Congress' notion of the general welfare, the reality, given the vast financial resources of the Federal Government, is that the Spending Clause gives "power to the Congress to tear down the barriers, to invade the states' jurisdiction, and to become a parliament of the whole people, subject to no restrictions save such as are self-imposed." … This, of course, as Butler held, was not the Framers' plan and it is not the meaning of the Spending Clause.” The controversy will no doubt continue, revolving around the nature of the appropriate power vested in the national government. In her closing words of dissent, Justice O'CONNOR reinforced that the United States “remains a Government of enumerated powers.” SourceseditAll Supreme Court cases have references at findlaw 66.235.31.160 16:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
removed 82 kB of content, the book THE POWER OF DREAMS & DESIRE
×Meegs 22:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
May God help every reader of this blessed publication to become a great Achiever.
(83.229.62.116 17:52, 28 March 2006 (UTC))
- Decline. This not the appropriate content for an Encycolpedia article. Unless you are the author or publisher, it is likely also copyrighted and unsuitable for Wikipedia. ×Meegs 22:28, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
((Rejotnik the Russian Rent-boy))
edit
|
|---|
Rejotnic Zukmeov was raised in a quiet back-street sex shop in the centre of Moscow. Many historians believe that it was on the eastern edge of the city, but their research has so far been inconclusive. Strict though they were, his parents loved and cherished him and always supported his views and ambitions. He worked alongside his father in the family shop, the "Woodpecker", and grew fond of specific customers. He seemed to have a knack of knowing just how they liked it and returning clients were a frequent event. In a normal adult pleasure distributor there are, from time to time, protégés, or boys that have a special talent for what they do, but due to the confined social climate in which the Zukmeovs lived they did not realise their sons special gift. As the months and years passed the time came for Rejotnic to start at Primary school and, looking out for his best interests, his parents sent him to a high achieving public school. His first day, week, month and year flew by and he made lots of friends due to his bubbly and charismatic persona. As Rejotnic was walking home one day with a particularly esteemed colleague by the name of Sheezagot Bigtats, when she asked him if they might play a game of ‘hide and seek’. Rejotnic was somewhat startled by this proposition, as the hour was late and his parents would be wondering where he was. After a little persuasion he gracefully accepted and he and Sheezagot played the game in a nearby wood. They ran about and found interesting crevices in which to hide, until they were quite exhausted. To recover they laid down on a large tree limb and talked about their day at school and how much of a dick-head that Alex Hagerdorn kid was. The conversation shifted into their previous lives, before school had grasped their feeble little minds. Rejotnik reluctantly told Sheezagot about his life in the shop and she proposed that he demonstrate his working technique on her. There was an awkward silence in which the two children looked into each others eyes and longed for their relationship to be preserved for aeons. Then with a flick of his middle finger he said “Fuck off ……….oh, all right then, ten quid”, and the evening ended with some bum-splittingly good sex. The word spread of Rejonik’s talents and soon a small networked founded itself and customers would travel to meet this gifted child (for an arranged fee of course), and so, the legend was created. Posters on teenager’s walls were changed from pictures of the spotty cunts they call the Arctic Monkeys, to compromising snaps of the famous Rejotnik Zukmeov. Little did the general public know that there would never be anyone quite as good as ‘Rejotnik the Russian rent-boy’.
SourceseditYee Haw!!! i love midgets long time!!!
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
His brother is Junia' Lee, a skilled producer from Missouri. Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
[Thompson Brothers]
edit
|
|---|
As hosts of Game Time Sunday Rewind on Fox Sports Radio they return to their Sports roots on weekly basis. They are also frequently asked to fill-in on the Fox Sports Radio line-up and have hosted The Morning Etravaganza, Out of Bounds, the Steve Czaban Show and most often, JT the Brick. The most common description of the Thompson Brothers shows is the "sounds like the kind of discussion you would have over drinks at the bar". Sourceseditwww.PrimeTimeSA.com www.WOAI.com 24.173.55.130 20:34, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Chichester High School is a four-year public high school in Boothwyn, Pennsylvania. Its mascot is an Eagle. It is currently the only high school in the Chichester School District.
Prominent alumni
edit- Billy "Whiteshoes" Johnson - American Football player
- John Mobley - 1991 - American Football linebacker for the Denver Broncos (1996-2003)
Sources
edit- http://www.chichesterschools.net/high/index.htm
- http://dev.denverbroncos.com/page.php?id=498&contentID=737
- http://www.sportsbytes.net/article.asp?articleid=57858
- [4]
- http://www.databasefootball.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=JOHNSBIL06
204.13.204.2 20:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
- Article created. Please help to expand it ASAP. Thanks for the submission. ×Meegs 23:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
Jared Homstad
edit
|
|---|
Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Landsflug
edit
|
|---|
Code DataeditServiceseditLandsflug operates the following services (at March 2006):
FleeteditThe Landsflug fleet consists of the following aircraft (at March 2006): External linkseditCategory:Airlines of Iceland
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Members:
David Aguero - Vocals Sourcesedit[http://evoneutra.active.ws Evolucion Neutra Official Website]
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Woolalaa
Sourcesedit
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
Rho Pi Phi (ΡΠΦ) is a professional pharmaceutical fraternity that is established in 1919 in the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy. The goal of this fraternity is described in its 3 mottos: 1. …to maintain the ethical standards, dignity of and pride in the most ancient and honorable profession of Pharmacy. 2. …to contribute to the moral, social, and intellectual welfare of all students in pharmacy. 3. …that we may take the lamp of research into the dark recesses of things unknown, and make our contribution to our fellow man. The fraternity also follows the Oath of Maimonides: "Thy eternal providence has appointed me to watch over the life and health of Thy creatures. May the love for my art actuate me at all times; may neither avarice nor miserliness, nor thirst for glory, or for a great reputation engage my mind; for the enemies of truth and philanthropy could easily deceive me and make me forgetful of my lofty aim of doing good to Thy children. May I never see in the patient anything but a fellow creature in pain. Grant me strength, time, and opportunity always to correct what I have acquired, always to extend its ___domain; for knowledge is immense and the spirit of man can extend infinitely to enrich itself daily with new requirements. Today he can discover his errors of yesterday and tomorrow he may obtain a new light on what he thinks himself sure of today. O God, Thou has appointed me to watch over the life and depth of thy creatures, here I am ready for my vocation, and now I turn unto my calling."
The fraternity currently has 4 active chapters: Lambda Sigma Delta, located at University of the Pacific, CA Beta chapter, located at Union University, Albany College of Pharmacy, NY Beta Galen Chapter, located at Philadelphia College of Pharmacy & Science, PA Gamma Gamma Rho, located at Northwestern University, IL
Sourcesedithttp://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/rhopiphi/ http://www.rhopiphi.com
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Melissa Brooks
edit
|
|---|
{{afc maybe|singing top-10 is notable. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 03:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)}} Update: Cannot verify music credentials. Remaining material is not notable enough for Wikipedia. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:42, 11 August 2007 (UTC) Melissa Brooks, (Born Febuary 8) Portsmouth, UK, is a female singer and a semi-actress, although she did at once appear in an adult movie she did not take off her bra or pants. She has also appeared in Hav Plenty and played the role of Hav's Co-Worker. In 2003 she released a single which got into the top 10 in the UK and the top 10 in malta as well. Actress Filmographyedit
Herself filmographyedit
- Episode dated 7 March 2003 (2003) TV Episode .... Herself
- Episode dated 1 March 2003 (2003) TV Episode .... Herself Single Chartedit
Triva & Biographyedit
Links & Referencesedit
Comment: Actress career is not notable. Top-10 music is notable but not verifiable. |
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Pay Cards!
edit
|
|---|
{{afc maybe|any show that lasted a season is notable in my book. [[User:davidwr|davidwr]]/<small><small>([[User_talk:davidwr|talk]])/([[Special:Contributions/Davidwr|contribs]])/([[Special:Emailuser/davidwr|e-mail]])</small></small> 03:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)}} Update: Article exists. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 01:44, 11 August 2007 (UTC) Pay Cards! was a game show based on the card game poker and produced by Nick Nicholson and Roger Muir. The show aired in syndication from1968-1969. Super Pay Cards! aired from 1981-1982 and was syndicated by Metromedia. Art James hosted both versions, but was joined by hostess Mary Lou Basaraba on the Super version. On Pay Cards!, three contestants, one of whom was a celebrity guest, playing for a member of the studio audience, competed by choosing cards from a board of 20 hidden cards. In the first round, each player, in turn, would select three cards to be revealed to start his or her poker hand. If the cards did not show a pair, the player could either keep those cards or turn them back. However, if a pair or three of a kind happened to be amongst the three selected cards, the player must keep those cards. Upon keeping three cards, the player selects one card and may either keep it or return it. Should a player refuse a card, control of the game passes to the next player. If only one player has not completed their hand, that player must keep each card he or she selects from the board. After each player has completed their hand, they are paid as follows: One pair: $10 Two pair: $20 Three of a kind: $30 Full house: $50 Four of a kind: $100 The player with the highest hand after each round earns a $50 bonus. The second round is called the "Strategy Round", in which four of the 20 cards are revealed to start the round. On each of the first two turns, each player calls out two cards to be revealed and then selects two cards from the six cards cards displayed to add to his or her hand. On each player's last turn, one card is called out and the player adds one of the five cards to complete his or her hand. In the third and final round, hidden amongst the 20 cards are a series of "wild cards" which allow for a payoff of $150 for five of a kind. The player who won the most money would be given the opportunity to win a bonus prize. The player would be shown a board of 12 cards to study for 12 seconds. The player would then spin a wheel which would determne which card the player must locate on the board. If the player locates the card which the wheel landed on, the player won the prize. Super Pay Cards!editTwo contestants faced a board of 16 hidden cards. Each player selected three cards and may keep them or turn them back. However, if a pair happened to be amongst the three cards, they must be kept. Upon keeping three cards, each player calls out one card on their subsequent turn and may either keep it or turn it back. As soon as one player completes their hand, the other player must complete their hand by keeping every card he or she selects. As soon as both players complete their hands, They are each paid as follows: Pair: $20 Two pair: $40 Three of a kind: $50 Full house: $100 Four of a kind: $200 The player with the higher hand after each round earns a $50 bonus. The second round may be played in one of three ways:
In the third round, a few "wild cards" are hidden on the board. This allows for a possible Five of a Kind, which results in a payoff of $300. After three rounds, the player who earns the most money advances to the bonus round. The other player would receive a copy of the Super Pay Cards! game. In the first part of the bonus round, the player would be shown four cards to study for four seconds. Mary Lou holds those same four cards in her hand. The player selects one from a blind draw. If the player can recall the position of that card on the board, the player wins $50 The second part involves the player studying eight cards and their positions for eight seconds. The player selects a card from a blind draw. If that card is found on the board, the player wins $500. On the third and final level, the player examines twelve cards for twelve seconds. If the card selected from the blind draw matches the first card revealed on the board, the player wins $5,000.-->
SourceseditThe Encyclopedia of TV Game Shows, Third Edition, by David Schwartz, Steve Ryan, and Fred Wostbrock.
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Galvin Park
edit
|
|---|
Back in the days of the 1976's there was a man. His name was Peter Park (er). he started a school in which there were no rules. These are some of the subjects they offer: Male-on-Male Sex Ed Burning Bible Class Arson Assistance Stabbing Hippies Rape Rehab Maths to Assist peddling drugs Racism Crosswords Masturbaters Anonymous Eating Sex w/ small animals
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
|
|---|
External linkseditCategory:Evangelical parachurch organisations Category:Religious organizations Sourcesedit64.126.43.81 22:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Yazoo Queen
edit
|
|---|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
The Grinning Man
edit
|
|---|
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |
Pitfall
edit
|
|---|
Pitfall is a game show hosted by Alex Trebek from 1981-1982 and produced by Catalena Productions. John Barton served as the announcer. Two contestants, and the studio audience, were given a survey question and four answers. Each audience member used their own electronic device to lock in an answer that best suited them. Each contestant then locked in their guess as to which answer was the most popular amongst the audience. One point was scored by each contestant who gave the top answer. The first player to score five points, or the player with the higher score after seven minutes of game play, advanced to the Pitfall round. The Pitfall roundeditThe champion would be given the opportunity to cross an eight-space bridge within 100 seconds. The set would dim and the eight sections would light up randomly. Each safe section would light up once, and each "pitfall" section would light up twice. After viewing the light show, the player would select from eight "pit passes" numbered 1-8. The player selected pit passes corresponding to which sections of the bridge he or she believed were "pitfalls". The contestant was allowed to select one pit pass if he or she scored one or two points in the front game, two passes if three or four points were scored, or three passes if he or she scored the five point maximum. Alex and the contestant would then ride an elevator to the second level of the two-level bridge. Before stepping to the first section of the bridge, the contestant must answer a question correctly. Each question answered correctly would allow the player to step to the next section. If the player stopped on a "pitfall" section, the clock would continue counting down as that particular section lowered to the first level. The player remained at the lower level until answering another question correctly. Doing so stopped the clock and raised the section back up to the upper level, but the player must answer another question correctly before advancing to the next section. If the player comes to a section which he or she believed to be a "pitfall", he or she may hand Trebek the "pit pass" for that particular section before crossing over it. Reaching the other end of the bridge before 100 seconds ran out would win the player a prize package worth over $5,000 (Canadian). Otherwise, the player earned $100 (Canadian) for each section he or she crossed over. Miscellaneous noteseditMany players from the show's last few weeks were not paid their winnings due to Catalena Productions' financial troubles. The company would go bankrupt soon thereafter. SourceseditAdam Pinckley209.205.158.251 01:23, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
|
| This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. |