UNited States - meaning of word
Rozmiar: 8938 bajtów


UNited States



#REDIRECT United States

United States



:''This article is about the country in North America. For other uses, see United States (disambiguation) and US (disambiguation)'' The United States of America—also referred to as the United States, the USA, the U.S., America, the States, and (poetically) Columbia—is a democracy federal republic of fifty U.S. state located primarily in central North America. The United States has land borders with Canada and Mexico, as well as several territorial water boundaries with Canada, Russia and The Bahamas. It is otherwise bounded by the Pacific Ocean, the Bering Sea, the Arctic Ocean, the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, and the Caribbean Sea. Two of the fifty states, Alaska, an exclave, and Hawaii, an archipelago, are not contiguous with any of the other states. The United States also has a collection of overseas territories and possessions around the world. Each of the 50 states has a high level of local autonomy under the federation system. The official founding date of the United States is July 4, 1776, the date the Second Continental Congress, representing the thirteen Kingdom of Great Britain 13 colonies, adopted the United States Declaration of Independence. However, the structure of the United States was profoundly changed in 1788 when the states replaced the Articles of Confederation with the United States Constitution; often, sources use the date each of the original 13 states adopted the Constitution as the date on that state "entered the Union" (became part of the United States). Since the mid-20th century, the United States has become a dominant Geopolitics influence in contemporary economic, political, military, scientific, technological and cultural matters. ==History== ''Main articles: History of the United States, Military history of the United States, Timeline of United States history, List of U.S. military history events'' [[Image:George-Washington.jpg|thumb|150px|left|First President of the United States, George Washington]] Following the European colonization of the Americas, thirteen colonies split from Great Britain and formed the United States, the world's first constitutional and democratic federal republic, after their United States Declaration of Independence in 1776 and the American Revolutionary War (1775–1783). The original political structure was a confederation in 1777, ratified in 1781 as the Articles of Confederation. After long Federalist papers, this was supplanted by the United States Constitution in 1789, forming a more centralized federalism government. Prior to all these was the Albany Congress in 1754, in which a union was first seriously proposed. From early colonial times, there existed a shortage of labor, which encouraged unfree labor, particularly indentured servitude and slavery. In the mid-19th century, a major division occurred in the United States over the issue of states' rights and the expansion of slavery. The northern states had become opposed to slavery, while the southern states saw it as necessary for the continued success of southern agriculture and wanted it expanded to the territories. Several federal laws were passed in an attempt to settle the dispute, including the Missouri Compromise and the Kansas-Nebraska Act. The dispute reached a crisis point in 1861, when seven southern states secededConfederate States of America#International Diplomacy and Legal Status from the Union and formed the Confederate States of America, leading to the American Civil War. Soon after the war began, four more southern states seceded. During the war, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, mandating the freedom of all slaves in states in rebellion, though full emancipation did not take place until after the end of the war in 1865, the dissolution of the Confederacy, and the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution took effect. The Civil War effectively ended the question of a state's right to secede, and is often cited as a major turning point, when the federal government became more powerful than state governments. During the 19th century, many new U.S. states were added to the original 13 as the nation expanded across the North American continent. In the process, the U.S. displaced most Native American nations, seizing or expropriating their lands, killing many, and forcibly relocating tribes to otherwise unwanted and barren areas. ''(See Trail of Tears).'' In some areas, Native American populations were reduced by foreign diseases contracted through contact with European settlers, and U.S. settlers acquired those emptied lands. Through coercion, military prowess, and diplomatic leverage, the U.S. acquired a number of overseas possessions, from Cuba to the Philippines, though it gave up most of these over time. ''See also United States territorial acquisitions.'' During this period the nation also became an industrialisation. This continued into the 20th century, which some have termed "the American Century" due to America's tremendous influence on the world. The nation became a center for invention and technological development; major technologies that America either developed or was greatly involved in improving are the telephone, television, computer, the Internet, nuclear weapons, nuclear power, air travel and space travel. In addition to the Civil War, another major traumatic experience for the nation was the Great Depression (19291939). The U.S. has also has taken part in several major foreign wars, including World War I and World War II (in which the U.S. was allied with Britain and other states). During the Cold War, the United States was a major player in the Korean War and Vietnam Wars, and, along with the Soviet Union, was considered one of the world's only two "superpowers". With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. emerged as the world's leading economic and military power. Beginning in the 1990s, the United States became very involved in police actions and peacekeeping, including actions in Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia and Liberia, and the first Gulf War to drive Iraq out of Kuwait. After September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001, the USA and other allied nations entered a U.S. invasion of Afghanistan and later a 2003 invasion of Iraq. == Government and politics == ''Main article: Politics of the United States'' The government of the United States may be accurately categorized as a republic or as a liberal democracy. Specifically, the United States is an example of a representative democracy. There are three levels of government in the United States—federal, state, and local. All of these are freely elected by the American people. Americans enjoy universal suffrage. ===Federal government=== The federal government of the United States is the national government. The Constitution of the United States limits the powers of the federal government to defense, foreign affairs, printing money, controlling trade and relations between the states, and protecting human rights. In addition to these explicitly stated powers, the government has generally extended these powers, citing the "necessary and proper clause" of the Constitution, into such areas as welfare and education. The federal government is made up of the Congress of the United States (the legislature branch), the President of the United States (the executive branch), and the Supreme Court of the United States (the judicial branch). These three branches are said to supply checks and balances on each other. The Congress is a Bicameralism lawmaking institution composed of the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate, which both meet in the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C. Traditionally, the House is considered the "lower house" and the Senate the "upper house," but Congressional publications refute this. The House has 435 members called representatives or congressmen and congresswomen, who are elected by the people of a congressional district to represent that district for a term of two years. The number of districts for each state depends on the size of the population of the state, and each state has at least one representative. As of the United States 2000 census, the districts had an average size of about 640,000 people. The Senate has 100 members called senators, who are also elected by the people of a state to represent that state for a term of six years. Each state has two senators, regardless of its size. The Constitution initially gave the power to elect senators to the state legislatures; the Seventeenth Amendment to the United States Constitution transferred this ability to the people. At the top of the executive branch is the President of the United States, who acts as the Commander in Chief of the armed forces. The President signs laws into action, and can also issue pardons and executive orders. He has few other Constitutional duties, among them being the requirement to give a State of the Union address to Congress from time to time. Below the President is the Vice President of the United States, who is first in the United States presidential line of succession and is the President of the Senate, with the ability to cast a tiebreaking vote. These two posts are elected, as running mates, by the people via the U.S. Electoral College for four year terms. Next are the members of the United States Cabinet, and the various departments they head, including the United States Department of Defense, the United States Department of Justice, and the United States Department of State. These departments and department heads hold much regulatory and political power, and it is these departments that are used to execute the laws of the nation. The judicial branch of the federal government is used when dealing with federal and constitutional matters. A case may be appealed from a state court to a federal court only if there is a federal question, the State supreme court is the final authority on the interpretation of that state's laws and constitution. The highest court in the land is the Supreme Court of the United States, which consists of nine justices and can declare legislation made at any level of the government as unconstitutional, nullifying the law and creating precedent for future law and decisions. Below the Supreme Court are the United States courts of appeals, and below that are the United States district court, which are the general trial courts for federal law. ===State and local governments=== The state governments have the greatest influence over people's daily lives. Each state has its own written constitution and has different laws. There are sometimes great differences in law and procedure between the different states, concerning issues such as property, crime, health, and education. The highest elected official of each state is the Governor. Each state also has an elected legislature with two houses (one, in Nebraska), whose members represent the different parts of the state. Of note is the New Hampshire legislature, which is the third largest legislative body in the English speaking world, and has one representative for every 3,000 people. Each state maintains its own judiciary, with the lowest level typically being county courts, and culminating in each state supreme court, though sometimes named differently. In some states, supreme and lower court justices are elected by the people; in others, they are appointed, as they are in the federal system. The institutions that are responsible for local government typically town, city, or county councils, making laws that effect their particular area. These laws concern issues such as traffic, the sale of alcohol, and keeping animals. The highest elected official of a town or city is usually the mayor. In some states in New England, the county have little or no power, existing only as geographic distinctions. In other areas, county governments have more power, such as to collect taxes and maintain law enforcement agencies. === Military === ''Main article: Military of the United States'' Four of America's five military branches are under the Department of Defense: United States Army, United States Marine Corps, United States Navy, and the United States Air Force. The United States Coast Guard is under the Department of Homeland Security. The combined United States armed forces consists of 1.4 million active duty personnel along with several hundred thousand each in the Reserves and National Guard. Military conscription ended in 1973. The United States Armed Forces is the most powerful military in the world and their force projection capabilities are unrivaled by any other single nation. === Foreign relations === ''Main article: Foreign relations of the United States'' The immense military, economic, and cultural dominance of the United States has made foreign relations an especially important topic in its politics, with considerable concern about the image of the United States throughout the world. Reactions towards the United States by other nationalities are often strong, ranging from uninhibited Amerophilia (admiration and mimicking of all things American) to Anti-Americanism. U.S. foreign policy has swung about several times over the course of its history between the poles of isolationism and imperialism and everywhere in between. == Geography == === Physical geography === ''Main article: Geography of the United States'' As the world's third largest country (by total area), the United States landscape varies greatly: temperate forestland and rolling hills on the East coast, mangrove in Florida, the Great Plains in the center of the country, the Mississippi River-Missouri River river system, the Great Lakes which are shared with Canada, the Rocky Mountains west of the plains, deserts and temperate coastal zones west of the Rocky Mountains and temperate rain forests in the Pacific Northwest. Alaska's tundra and the volcano, tropical islands of Hawaii add to the geographic and climatic diversity. The climate varies along with the landscape, from tropical in Hawaii and southern Florida to tundra in Alaska and atop some of the highest mountains. Most of the North and East experience a temperate continental climate, with warm summers and cold winters. Most of the American South experiences a subtropical humid climate with mild winters and long, hot, humid summers. Rainfall decreases markedly from the humid forests of the Eastern Great Plains to the semiarid shortgrass prairies on the High Plains abutting the Rocky Mountains. Arid deserts, including the Mojave desert, extend through the lowlands and valleys of the American Southwest from westernmost Texas to California and northward throughout much of Nevada. Some parts of the American West, including San Francisco, California, have a Mediterranean climate. Rain forests line the windward mountains of the Pacific Northwest from Oregon to Alaska. === Political geography === The political geography is notable as well, with the Canadian border being the longest undefended border in the world, and with the country being divided into three distinct sections: The continental United States, also known as the lower 48; Alaska, which is physically connected only to Canada, and the archipelago of Hawaii in the central Pacific Ocean.
=== Political divisions === ''Main article: Political divisions of the United States'' With the United States Declaration of Independence, the thirteen colonies transformed themselves into nation states modeled after the European states of the time. Although considered as sovereigns initially, under the constitution they have delegated certain powers to the Congress, but have retained the majority of legislative authority for themselves. In the following years, the number of states within the U.S. grew steadily due to western expansion, the conquest and purchase of lands by the national government, and the subdivision of existing states, resulting in the current total of 50. The states are generally divided into smaller administrative regions, including county (United States), List of cities of the United States and township (United States)s. The United States also holds several other territories, districts and possessions, notably the federal district of the District of Columbia, which is the nation's capital, and several overseas insular areas, the most significant of which are Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands. The United States Navy has held a base at an occupied portion of Guantanamo Bay, Cuba since 1898. The United States government claims a lease to this land, which only mutual agreement or United States abandonment of the area can terminate. The Cuban government disputes this arrangement, claiming Cuba was not truly sovereign at the time of the signing. === Largest cities === {|align=right | |- | |- | |} ''Main article: List of cities in the United States'' The United States has dozens of major cities, including several important global cities such as New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago. The figures expressed below are for populations within city limits. A different ranking is evident when considering metropolitan areas, although the top three would be unchanged. The twenty largest cities, based on the United States 2000 Census[http://www.census.gov/statab/ccdb/cit1020r.txt], are: {|align=left cellpadding=2 style="text-align:right; font-size: 100%; margin-left: 15px" ! Rank !!align=center| City !! Population |- | 1. ||align=left | New York City || 8,008,278 |- | 2. ||align=left | Los Angeles, California || 3,694,820 |- | 3. ||align=left | Chicago, Illinois || 2,896,016 |- | 4. ||align=left | Houston, Texas || 1,953,631 |- | 5. ||align=left | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania || 1,517,550 |- | 6. ||align=left | Phoenix, Arizona || 1,321,045 |- | 7. ||align=left | San Diego, California || 1,223,400 |- | 8. ||align=left | Dallas, Texas || 1,188,580 |- | 9. ||align=left | San Antonio, Texas || 1,144,646 |- |10. ||align=left | Detroit, Michigan || 951,270 |- |11. ||align=left | San Jose, California || 894,943 |- |12. ||align=left | Indianapolis, Indiana || 791,926 |- |13. ||align=left | San Francisco, California || 776,733 |- |14. ||align=left | Jacksonville, Florida || 735,617 |- |15. ||align=left | Columbus, Ohio || 711,470 |- |16. ||align=left | Austin, Texas || 656,562 |- |17. ||align=left | Baltimore, Maryland || 651,154 |- |18. ||align=left | Memphis, Tennessee || 650,100 |- |19. ||align=left | Milwaukee, Wisconsin || 596,974 |- |20. ||align=left | Boston, Massachusetts || 589,141 |- |}

It should be noted that some cities not listed are still considered important on the basis of other factors and issues, including culture, economics, heritage and politics. == Economy == === National economy === ''Main article: Economy of the United States'' The economy of the United States is organized primarily on a capitalism, with some government regulation in many industries. There are also some social welfare programs like Social Security (United States) and unemployment benefits, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families ("welfare"), the Earned Income Tax Credit, Medicare (United States), and Medicaid. Such departures from a pure free market economy have generally increased since the late 1800s, but are less pronounced in the United States than in other industrialized countries. [[Image:U.S._one_dollar_obverse.jpg|right|thumb|220px|The United States dollar is the official currency.]] The country has rich mineral resources, with extensive gold, oil, coal, and uranium deposits. Successful Agriculture rank the country among the top producers of, among others, maize, wheat, sugar, and tobacco. The U.S. manufacturing produces, among other things, automobile, airplanes, and electronics. The largest industry is now Tertiary sector of industry, which employs roughly three-quarters of U.S. residents. Economic activity varies greatly from one part of the country to another, with many industries being largely dependent on a certain city or region; New York City is the center of the American finance, publishing, broadcasting, and advertising industries; Silicon Valley is the country’s primary location for high technology companies, while Los Angeles is the most important center for film production. The Midwest is known for its reliance on manufacturing and heavy industry, with Detroit serving as the center of the American automotive industry; the Great Plains are known as “the breadbasket of America” for their tremendous agricultural output, while Texas is largely associated with the oil industry; the Southeastern U.S. is a major hub for medical research, as well as many of the nation's textiles manufacturers. Several countries continue to link their currency to the United States dollar (such as the People's Republic of China), or even use it as a currency (such as Ecuador), although this practice has subsided since the collapse of the Bretton Woods system. The largest trading partner of the United States is Canada (20%), followed by Mexico (12%), People's Republic of China (Mainland 10%, Hong Kong 1%) and Japan (8%). More than 50% of total trade is with these four countries. In 2003, the United States was World Tourism Rankings as the third most visited Tourism destination in the world; its 40.4 million visitors ranked behind France's 75 million and Spain's 52.5 million. ''See also: List of United States companies'' === Transportation === [[Image:La city hwys.jpg|thumb|left|200px|Stack interchange in Los Angeles ]] ''Main article: Transportation in the United States'' Because the United States is such a relatively young nation, most of the development of US cities has taken place after the invention of the automobile. To link its vast territories, the United States built a network of high capacity, high speed highways, of which the most important aspect is the Interstate Highway system. The United States also has a First Transcontinental Railroad which is used for moving freight across the lower 48 states. Many cities in the United States have extensive mass transit systems. New York City, NY operates the world's largest and most heavily used subway system. Air travel is often preferred for destinations over 300 mile (500 kilometer) away, and some airports, such as Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport and Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, are among the busiest in the world. There are several major seaports in the United States, including New York City, Savannah, Georgia, Miami, Florida, Houston, Texas, Los Angeles, California, and Seattle, Washington, plus Anchorage, Alaska and Honolulu, Hawaii outside of the contiguous 48 states.
== Society == === Demographics === [[Image:USA 2000 population density.png|thumb|2000 population density by county]] ''Main article: Demographics of the United States'' ====Ethnicity and race==== Americans, in part due to Race (U.S. census) outlined by the U.S. government, generally describe themselves as beloging to one of five groups: Whites, also called ''Caucasian'' (those having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa); Black, also called ''African American'' (those having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa); American Indian/Alaskan Native, also called ''Native American'' (those having origins in any of the original peoples of North, Central and South America, and who maintain tribal affiliation or community attachment); Asian, also called ''Asian American'' (those having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent); and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (those having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands). In addition to these, the category "Some other race" was included in the 2000 census for respondents who were unable to identify with any of the five Office of Management and Budget race categories. Those who identified as "South African", "Belizean", a Hispanic origin (eg. Mexican, Mexican-American, Puerto Rican, Cuban, etc.) or even "American" were included in the "Some other race" category. The Census Bureau considers race to be separate from Hispanic origin. The category Asian is popularly identified with East Asia, rather than South Asia or Southwest Asia Asia. The term ''African-American'' is associated with centuries-long residents, and does not make distinctions between them and, say, recent Afro-Caribbean immigrants from Jamaica or imigrants from Nigeria or refugees from Somalia. The majority of the 295 million people currently living in the United States descend from Europe immigrants who have arrived since the establishment of the first colonies. Major components of the European segment of the United States population are descended from immigrants from Germany (15.2%), Ireland (10.8%), England (8.7%), Italy (5.6%), Scandinavia (3.7%) and many immigrants also coming from Slavs countries. Other significant immigrant populations came from eastern and southern Europe and French Canada, though far more immigrants came directly to America from France than came via French Canada. These numbers, however, are less precise than they appear, as many citizens listed themselves as "American" on the census (7.2%). A :Image:Census-2000-Data-Top-US-Ancestries-by-County.jpg reveals that the areas with the largest "American" ancestry populations were mostly settled by English, Scottish, Irish and Welsh, suggesting that the percentages listed for those groups should consequently be slightly larger. Similarly, while there were few immigrants directly from Spain, Hispanics in the United States from Mexico and South and Central America are considered the largest minority group in the country, comprising 13.4% of the population in 2002. This has brought increasing use of the Spanish in the United States. Mexicans alone made up 7.3% of the population in the 2000 census, and this proportion is expected to increase significantly in the coming decades. The Hispanic category is based more on language than race and is defined by the Census as anybody from or with forebears from Spain or Spanish-speaking Latin America so Hispanics may be of any race. About 45% identify by their ethnic background only (e.g., "Mexican", "Colombian"); they are usually mestizos or even American Indians of unmixed ancestry. About 40% identify as white with more European (especially Spanish) ancestry; however, on average, they tend to have more Amerindian or African blood than non-Hispanic whites. They are a diverse group consisting of most Puerto Ricans and Cubans, and a large proportion of the New Mexico Spanish, Tejanos, and recent South American immigrants, as well as children of mixed marriages between Hispanics and non-Hispanic whites. Another 5% identify as black or mulatto; they typically are descended from Spanish-speaking Caribbean immigrants such as Dominican Republic. The remainder includes mostly self-identified Indians (Maya, Mixtec, etc.) and people of mixed background. Most Filipinos, however, are not considered Hispanic. About 12.9% (2000 census) of the American people are African Americans, most of whom are descendants of the slave trade brought to the U.S. between the 1620s and 1807. Starting in the 1970s, the black population has been bolstered by immigration from the Caribbean, especially Jamaica and Haiti; more recently, starting in the 1990s, there has been an influx of African immigrants to the United States due to the instability in political and economic opportunities in various nations in Africa. A third significant minority is the Asian American population (4.2%), most of whom are concentrated on the West Coast of the United States and Hawaii. It is by no means a monolithic group; the largest groups are immigrants or descendants of emigrants from China, the Philippines, India, Vietnam, South Korea and Japan. While the Asian-American population is generally a fairly recent addition to the nation's ethnic mix, large waves of Chinese, Filipino and Japanese immigration happened in the mid to late 1800s. The aboriginal population of Native Americans, such as American Indians and Inuit, make up about 1.5% of the population. According to the 2000 census, the United States has 37 ethnic groups with at least one million people each. ''See also: Immigration to the United States'' ==== Religion ==== ''Main articles: Religion in the United States, Demographics of the United States#Religious Affiliation'' Self-Described Religious Identification of Adult Population: 1990 and 2001 [http://www.gc.cuny.edu/faculty/research_briefs/aris/key_findings.htm] {|border=1 align=left cellpadding=4 style="text-align:right; border-collapse: collapse; font-size: 90%; margin-left: 50px;" |+ align=bottom | [http://www.census.gov/prod/www/religion.htm Source: US Census] ! !! 1990 !! 2001 !! Change
in % |- !align=left |Total Christian | 86.4% | 76.7% | -9.7% |- |align=left style="text-indent:15px"| Catholic | 26.2% | 24.5% | -1.8% |- |align=left style="text-indent:15px"| Protestantism | 55.2% | 45.1% | -10.1% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"|Baptist | 19.4% | 16.3% | -3.1% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"|Methodism/Wesleyan | 8.1% | 6.8% | -1.3% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"|Lutheranism | 5.2% | 4.6% | -0.6% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"|Presbyterianism | 2.8% | 2.7% | -0.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Protestant - no denomination supplied | 9.8% | 2.2% | -7.6% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Pentecostalism/Charismatic | 1.8% | 2.1% | +0.3% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Episcopal/Anglicanism | 1.7% | 1.7% | -0.1% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Mormon/Latter-Day Saints | 1.4% | 1.3% | -0.1% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Church of Christ | 1.0% | 1.2% | +0.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:40px"| Other Protestant (less than 1% each) | 4.0% | 6.2% | +2.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:15px"|Christian - no denomination supplied | 4.6% | 6.8% | +2.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:15px"|Eastern Orthodox Church | 0.3% | 0.3% | -- |- !align=left|Total other religions | 3.3% | 3.7% | +0.4% |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Judaism || 1.8%|| 1.4%|| -0.4% |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Islamic|| 0.3%|| 0.5%|| +0.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Buddhism|| 0.2%|| 0.5%|| +0.3% |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Hinduism|| 0.1%||0.4%||+0.2% |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Unitarian Universalism|| 0.3%||0.3%|| -- |- |align=left style="text-indent:10px"| Others (less than 0.07% each)|| 0.6%||0.6%|| -- |--- !align=left |Total No religion | 8.2% | 14.2% | +6.0% |--- !align=left |Total Refused to reply | 2.3% | 5.4% | +3.1% |}

The United States is noteworthy among developed nations for its relatively high level of religiosity. Overall, more than 25% of Americans attend a religious service at least once a week. However, this rate is not uniform across the country; attendance is more common in the Bible Belt—composed largely of Southern U.S. and Midwest states—than in the Northeastern United States and West Coast of the United States. === Education === ''Main article: Education in the United States'' In the United States, education is a state, not federal, responsibility, and the laws and standards vary considerably. In most states, all students must attend mandatory schooling starting with kindergarten and following through 12th grade. Parents may educate their own children at home (with varying degrees of state oversight), send their children to a public school, which is free, or to a private school, where parents must pay tuition. Public schools are highly decentralized with funding and curriculum decisions taking place mostly at the local level through school boards. After high school, students have a choice of attending either a public university/state university or a private university. Public universities receive funding from the federal and state government but students still pay tuition, which can vary depending on the university, state, and whether the student is a resident of the state or not. Tuition at private universities tends to be much higher than at public universities. American colleges and universities range from highly competitive schools, such as Harvard University, to hundreds of local community colleges with open admission policies. For a complete list, see List of colleges and universities in the United States. === Language === ''Main article: Languages in the United States'' The United States does not have an official language at federal level; nevertheless, English language is spoken by the vast majority of the population and serves as the ''de facto'' language: English is the language used for legislation, regulations, executive orders, treaties, federal court rulings, and all other official pronouncements. Twenty-seven individual states have adopted English as their official language, and three of those—Hawaii, Louisiana, and New Mexico—have also adopted a second official language (Hawaiian language, French language and Spanish language, respectively). Spanish language follows English as the second-most spoken language in the United States, primarily due to the influence of recent Latin American immigrants, and it is a primary spoken language in some areas of the U.S. Southwestern states. The primary signed language is American Sign Language (ASL). As of 2004, the United States was the home of approximately 336 languages (spoken or signed), of which 176 are indigenous to U.S. territory. === Class === In terms of relative wealth, U.S. residents enjoy a standard of personal economic wealth that is close to that known in Scandinavian countries and Switzerland. For example, 51% of all households have access to a computer and 67.9% of U.S. households owned their dwellings in 2002. However, there is also a considerable amount of poverty in the United States with 12.1% of the population living below the official national poverty level. The social structure of the United States is somewhat stratified, with a significant class of very wealthy individuals; eleven of the twenty list of billionaires are Americans. On one widely used measure of inequality, the Gini coefficient, the United States has the highest inequality of any wealthy country. Nevertheless, ideas of social mobility figure prominently in the American dream, which holds that someone born into a poor family can, through hard work, ultimately rise into the upper classes. However, there is debate over how often this actually occurs in modern American society, both compared with earlier eras and with other developed nations. ''See also: Richest places in the United States and Poorest places in the United States'' === Social issues === ''Main articles: Social issues in the United States, Human rights in the United States, Health care in the United States'' [[Image:United States Bill of Rights.jpg|200px|thumb|The American Bill of Rights, enacted in 1791, provides a list of basic guaranteed rights]] The Constitution makes provisions for the rights of freedom of speech, the right to keep and bear arms, freedom of religion, trial by jury, and protection from cruel and unusual punishment. The United States accepts many immigration, and has anti-discrimination laws to protect minority groups. Some examples of these are the various Civil Rights Acts, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and hate crime legislation. Nevertheless, the United States has at times been criticized for alleged violations of human rights, including racial discrimination in trials and sentences, police abuses, excessive and unwarranted incarceration, and the imposition of the death penalty in some states. In 2001, Human Rights Watch issued a report stating that United States had "made little progress in embracing international human rights standards at home." [http://www.hrw.org/wr2k1/usa/] === Culture === ''Main article: Culture of the United States'' [[Image:Elvisstamp.jpg|frame|right|Elvis Presley, an American singer and star who had a large impact on music and youth culture in the world.]] U.S. culture has a large influence on the rest of the world, especially the Western world. This influence is sometimes criticized as cultural imperialism. Music of the United States is heard all over the world, and it is the sire of such forms as blues and jazz and had a primary hand in the shaping of modern rock and roll and popular music culture. Many great Western classical musicians and ensembles find their home in the U.S. New York City is a hub for international operatic and instrumental music as well as the world-famed Broadway plays and musicals, while Seattle, Washington and the rest of Washington is a world leader in the grunge and heavy metal music industries, as well as the visual arts. New York, Seattle, and San Francisco, California are worldwide leaders in graphic design and New York and Los Angeles, California compete with major European cities in the fashion industry. Cinema of the United States (primarily embodied in Hollywood) and Television of the United States shows can be seen almost anywhere. This is in stark contrast to the early days of the republic, when the country was viewed by Europeans as an agricultural backwater with little to offer the culturally "advanced" world centers of Asia and Europe. Nearing the mid-point of its third century of nationhood, the U.S. plays host to the gamut of human intellectual and artistic endeavor in nearly every major city, offering classical and popular music; historical, scientific and art research centers and museums; dance performances, musicals and plays; outdoor art projects and internationally significant architecture. This development is a result of both contributions by private philanthropists and government funding. ''See also: Arts and entertainment in the United States, Media of the United States'' ==== Sports ==== Some sports that originated or evolved in the United States, particularly basketball, American football, and baseball, which is often referred to as the Great American Pastime, have achieved a worldwide audience; the Super Bowl, the annual championship game of the National Football League, is one of the highest watched broadcasts in the world, with viewership far outnumbering the total American population. Baseball is extremely popular in Latin American nations and Japan, and football has had some success in expanding to Europe (NFL Europe). NASCAR (stock car racing) is also one of America's top sports; it is the fastest growing sport in America. However, few "foreign" sports have caught on in America; attempts to create professional soccer (football) leagues have struggled, and cricket and rugby are not played on any professional level. The United States hosts some of the premier events in other sports such as golf (including The Masters), tennis (U.S. Open (tennis)), and auto racing (particularly the Indianapolis 500), hosted the Football World Cup in 1994, and has hosted eight Olympics, more than any other nation. The United States generally fares very well in the Olympics, especially the Summer Olympics. In 2004, the US collected a record 100 total Olympic medals. == Federal holidays == ''Main article: Holidays of the United States'' {| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="border-collapse:collapse;border:1px solid gray;font-size:95%" |- style="background:#efefef;" ! Date !! Name !! Remarks |- | January 1 || New Year's Day || Beginning of year, marks the traditional end of the "holiday season." |- | January, third Monday || Martin Luther King, Jr. Day || Honors the late civil rights leader. Few non-governmental organizations grant time off for this holiday. |- | February, third Monday || Presidents' Day || Honors former U.S. presidents, especially George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, who both share February birthdays. Few non-governmental organizations grant time off for this holiday. |- | May, last Monday || Memorial Day || Honors servicemen and women who died in service; also marks the traditional beginning of summer. |- | July 4 || Independence Day (US) || Usually called the Fourth of July. Celebrates the United States' independence from Great Britain, formally declared on this date in 1776. |- | September, first Monday || Labor Day || Celebrates achievements of workers. This holiday is held instead of the traditional worldwide Labor Day, May Day, which actually began in the U.S. Also marks the traditional end of summer. |- | October, second Monday || Columbus Day || Honors Christopher Columbus, traditional discoverer of the Americas. Somewhat controversial, and few non-governmental organizations grant time off for this holiday. Hawaii does not honor the day, instead celebrating Discoverer's Day in honor of James Cook. |- | November 11 || Veterans Day || Previously known as Armistice Day. Honors those who have served in the military. Also marks the end of World War I in 1918. Traditional observation of a moment of silence at 11 a.m. |- | November, fourth Thursday || Thanksgiving || Day of thanks that marks the traditional beginning of the "holiday season." The day before Thanksgiving is traditionally the busiest travel day of the year in the U.S., and the day after is traditionally the busiest shopping day of the year, known as "Black Friday." |- | December 25 || Christmas || Celebration of Christmas, the birth of Jesus. In recent years, it has become a more secular winter holiday outside of religious communities, with many non-Christians and non-observant Christians buying and exchanging traditional Christmas gifts. Most retailers count on the Christmas holiday to provide a significant portion of their total annual sales. |} == Related topics == ''Main article: List of United States-related topics'' {| align="center" class="toccolours" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left" |- bgcolor="#ccccff" | colspan="2" align="center" | List of United States-related topics |- valign="top" ! History of the United States || Timeline of United States history (Colonial America | American Revolution | United States territorial acquisitions | American Civil War | World War 1 | Great Depression | World War 2 | Cold War | Vietnam War | Civil Rights Movement ) | Foreign relations of the United States | Military history of the United States | Demographic history of the United States and Stamps and postal history of the United States history |- valign="top" ! Politics of the United States || Law of the United States (United States Constitution and United States Bill of Rights | United States Declaration of Independence) | List of political parties in the United States (United States Democratic Party & United States Republican Party ) | Elections in the United States (Electoral College) | Political scandals of the United States | Political divisions of the United States |- valign="top" ! Federal Government of the United States || List of United States federal agencies | Legislative branch (Congress: United States House of Representatives | United States Senate ) Executive branch (President of the United States & Vice-President of the United States | United States Cabinet | United States Attorney General | United States Secretary of State ) | :Category:Law enforcement in the United States ( Federal Bureau of Investigation | Intelligence:CIA | DIA | NIMA | NRO | NSA) | Judicial branch (Supreme Court of the United States ) | Military of the United States (United States Army | United States Navy | United States Marine Corps | United States Air Force ) |- valign="top" ! Geography of the United States || Appalachian Mountains | Rocky Mountains | Grand Canyon | Great Plains | Midwest | U.S. Southern states | Mississippi River | New England | Mid-Atlantic States | Pacific Northwest | List of mountains of the United States | List of valleys of the United States | List of islands of the United States | List of rivers in the United States | US State | List of cities in the United States | County | list of regions of the United States | Extreme points of the United States |- valign="top" ! Economy of the United States || Banking in the United States | List of United States companies | Standard of living in the United States | United States dollar | Wall Street |- valign="top" ! Demographics of the United States || US Census Bureau | Languages in the United States | Religion in the United States | Social structure of the United States | Standard of living in the United States |- valign="top" ! Arts and entertainment in the United States & Culture of the United States || Music of the United States (Hippies | Blues | Jazz | Rock and roll | Hip hop | gospel music | country music ) | Cinema of the United States & Television of the United States (Hollywood) | Literature of the United States (Poetry of the United States | Transcendentalism | Harlem Renaissance | Beat Generation) | Visual arts of the United States (Abstract expressionism ) | Cuisine of the United States | Holidays of the United States | American folklore | Dance of the United States | Architecture of the United States | Education in the United States | Languages in the United States | Media in the United States |- valign="top" ! Other || United States territory | Communications in the United States | Transportation in the United States (United States highway and Interstate highway | List of United States railroads ) | Uncle Sam | Flag of the United States | American Dream | Media in the United States | Education in the United States | Tourism in the United States | Social issues in the United States (Immigration to the United States | Affirmative action | Racial profiling | Human rights in the United States | War on Drugs | Pornography in the United States | Same-sex marriage in the United States | Poverty in the United States | United States prison population | Capital punishment in the United States ) | American Exceptionalism | Anti-Americanism | American Folklore | American English | United States Mexico barrier |} == International rankings == * IMD International: [http://www01.imd.ch/wcy/ World Competitiveness Yearbook 2005], ranked 1 out of 60 economies (countries and regions) * World Economic Forum: [http://www.weforum.org/site/homepublic.nsf/Content/Global+Competitiveness+Programme%5CGlobal+Competitiveness+Report Global Competitiveness Report 2004-2005 - Growth Competitiveness Index Ranking], ranked 2 out of 104 countries * A.T. Kearney/Foreign Policy: [http://www.atkearney.com/main.taf?p=5,4,1,116 Globalization Index 2005], ranked 4 out of 62 countries * United Nations Development Programme: [http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2004/ Human Development Index 2004], ranked 8 out of 177 countries * Save the Children: [http://www.savethechildren.org/mothers/report_2005/ State of the World's Mothers 2005], ranked 11 out of 110 countries * The Wall Street Journal: [http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/ 2005] Index of Economic Freedom, ranked 12 out of 155 countries * The Economist: [http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005 The World in 2005 - Worldwide quality-of-life index, 2005], ranked 13 out of 111 countries * Transparency International: [http://www.transparency.org/pressreleases_archive/2004/2004.10.20.cpi.en.html Corruption Perceptions Index 2004], ranked 17 out of 146 countries (tied with Belgium and Ireland) * Reporters without borders: [http://www.rsf.fr/article.php3?id_article=11715 Third annual worldwide press freedom index (2004)], ranked 22 (American territory; tied with Belgium) & 108 (in Iraq) out of 167 countries ==Notes== ''America'' may refer to the nation of the United States or to ''the Americas'' — North America, Central America and South America. The latter usage is more common in Latin American countries where the Spanish language and Portuguese word ''América'' refers to both continents. The ''United States'' (or ''Estados Unidos'' in Spanish and Portuguese) is a less ambiguous term and less likely to cause offense. The term ''American'' meaning a citizen or national of the United States has no straightforward unambiguous synonym. Many alternative words for American have been proposed, but none have enjoyed widespread acceptance.
== External links == === United States government === *[http://www.firstgov.gov Official website of the United States government] - Gateway to governmental sites *[http://www.whitehouse.gov White House] - Official site of the US President *[http://www.senate.gov Senate.gov] - Official site of the United States Senate *[http://www.house.gov House.gov] - Official site of the United States House of Representatives *[http://www.supremecourtus.gov Supreme Court] - Official site of the Supreme Court of the United States *[http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/factover/homepage.htm Portrait of the USA] - Published by the United States Information Agency, September 1997. *[http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/ US Census Housing and Economic Statistics] Updated regularly by US Bureau of the Census. *[http://nationalatlas.gov/ The National Atlas] of the United States. *[http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html CIA World Factbook Entry for United States] === Other === *[http://www.mediatico.com/en US Newspapers by State] *[http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm National Motto: History and Constitutionality] *[http://www.nationalcenter.org/HistoricalDocuments.html Historical Documents] *[http://www.travel-directory.org/Destinations/North_America/United_States/index.html Reference: US specific web resources sorted by state] *[http://www.teacheroz.com/states.htm info links for each state] *[http://www.adbusters.org/jams/history/timeline.swf Archive of 163 US interventions] North American countries Republics United States os:Америкæйы Иугонд Штаттæ ang:Geánlǽht Underrícu American bn:যুক্তরাষ্ট্র bs:Sjedinjene Američke Države cv:Америкăри Пĕрлешӳллĕ Штатсем chr:ᎠᎺᎢ fa:ایالات متحده آمریکا ga:Stáit Aontaithe Mheiriceá gd:Na Stàitean Aonaichte ht:Etazini hi:संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका iu:ᐊᒥᐊᓕᑲ ks:संयुक्त राज्‍य अमेरिका la:Civitates Americae Unitae lv:Amerikas Savienotās Valstis li:Vereinegde State van Amerika mt:Stati Uniti ms:Amerika Syarikat zh-min-nan:Bí-kok nah:Altepetl Osehsepanoaseh Amerikak nv:Wááshindoon bikéyah ałhidadiidzooígíí nds:USA rm:Stadis Unids da l'America se:Amerihká ovttastuvvan stáhtat simple:United States th:สหรัฐอเมริกา vi:Hoa Kỳ

United States



''An event mentioned in this article is a MediaWiki:July 4 selected anniversaries'' ------- /Archive 1 | /Archive 2 | /Archive 3 | /Archive 4 | /Archive 5 | /Archive 6 | /Archive 7 ---- == National Traumas == The history summary in the main article contains the following sentence: Three major traumatic experiences for the nation were the Civil War (1861-1865), the Great Depression (1929-1939), and September 11, 2001. While the statement is factually true, it seems to reflect a strikingly distorted point of view. The terrorist attack of 9/11 is historically significant, but doesn't approach the magnitude of the Civil War or the Great Depression. Other wars (Vietnam, Korea, WW2, WW1, the Revolutionary War) must all certainly outrank 9/11 as national traumas. I think that, under the heading of History, the article should take a longer perspective than that of contemporary U.S. politics. Even at the present moment the U.S. faces a number of challenges, from flu to drunk driving, that are far greater objective threats to its citizens than terrorism. ::I tend to disagree that Sept 11 ranks below other national tragedies. While the number of lives and value destroyed in other events was far greater there are a number of aspects that make it unique. :::1 - a significant number of people across the world saw the event first hand real time. We had no government censors making sure we saw the beaches Normandy in our hometown papers without dead people on them. :::2 - it represents a new paradigm for terrorism in the world. Example more British citizens died in that event than in any other terrorist attack in their history. This is after all the years of putting up with the IRA. :::3 - it was a watershed moment in our current history that is coloring our present lives. The true impart of the event is still unfolding. I don't think it's problematic including Sep 11 in 'National Traumas' - however to exclude the Vietnam War strikes me as odd. It was an event that deeply affected a huge number of Americans and moulded the political and cultural development of the country to a significant degree in the final few decades of the 20th century. The jury has to be out as to whether Sep 11 will have the same long-term impact on the US. User:Nickfraser 20:08, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::It's possibly worth noting the Spanish entry doesn't seem to have any mention of the Madrid train bombings, nor does the UK entry mention any significant IRA attacks (or the IRA campaign/s) - such as the direct attacks on the UK Government in Brighton. Having this sort of specific mention of a single event seems incongruous in comparison to these articles in particular. == National Debt == The economy part of the page doesn't say anything about the huge public debt of the USA. I don't know the correct numbers, but I think it's about $25,000 per capita, which makes it a major economic problem. An interesting subject to cover but surely 'Economy_of_the_United_States' page is the better place for this rather than the main page, there's nothing meaty about the subject on that page as far as I can see so if anybody would like to write something - suggested subsection title 'Structural Problems within the US Economy' - you could talk about the deficit, pensions/ageing population, and any other long-term potential problems etc. If others agree can this section 'National Debt' be closed as an outstanding issue to address for this specific page? User:Nickfraser 20:28, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC) == Ethnicity and Race == When talking about European descendents you should keep in mind the numbers given on a brass plaque on Ellise Island. You will find that most immigrants between 1850 and 1930 were actually from Russia, followed by people from the Austro-Hungarian monarchy, Italy ... This is not really reflected in your demographic survey. ==Map== Is this map free/PD? [http://www.cast.uark.edu/local/catalog/national/html/Population.htmldir/USpop1990.html link]; It's a great map and I'd like to have it in the demographics subarticle. User:Sverdrup 17:18, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC) :[[Image:USA 2000 population density.jpg|thumb|2000 population density]] :Several months late in this reply, but whether or not the map is free/PD can be irrelevant. You can make a very similar map at [http://www.nationalatlas.gov/natlas/NatlasStart.asp nationalatlas.gov] (zoom to lower 48, remove lat/long lines, add counties, add population density 2000). I went ahead and did this and created an image and uploaded it. The colors are different, but big deal (an easy color change could be made). == Economic summary == The economic summary is ridiculous. From reading it, one would think the only involvement the government has with the economy is doling out welfare and interfering with industry. You'd never know that the US government financed the development of the Internet for decades, gives massive corporate welfare to agribusiness and other business and so forth. Then there's this beauty - "The U.S. economy is marked by steady growth, low unemployment, low inflation, a large trade deficit and rapid and rapid advances in technology." Steady growth? Like the unemployment after the recessions in the early 2000s, early 1990s, early 1980s, early 1970s and so forth? Even if we went on a multi-year timeline, growth from say 1974-2004 is not at the steady pace that 1944-1974 growth was. Low unemployment? U-6 unemployment hovers around 10%. Which shoots up when the US is not in an economic recovery? Low compared to what, the USSR's 0% unemployment? The US only has several months of unemployment benefits, unlike Europe, this only serves to mask unemployment. I wouldn't term the advances in technology in the United States rapid either - how have people's lives changed much since the 1950s? 1904-1954 was a rapid technological advance, 1954-2004 I would not characterize as rapid. User:Ruy Lopez 20:33, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::The unemployment rate has absolutely nothing to do with unemployment benefits, whoever was deleting your text was doing so because you were plain wrong. - me ::This discussion was posted ten days ago. We are still waiting for the people who keep deleting the material on the US economy to justify their position. They have not said one word. Under the circumstances, I shall keep reinserting Ruy Lopez's text until they do come to the talk page to discuss their dispute. User:Shorne 16:03, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::The reality of the $7,449,000,000,000+ national debt issue also kind of needs to be mentioned. By the sound of this article, you'd think the US was booming, rather than coming up to a financial collapse like the 1980's era USSR was, which is the actual fact of the matter. --User:Ce garcon 19:57, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC) ::::To be entirely objective, then, the article should also mention that in percentage terms, this national debt level is not significantly greater than that of most other industrialized OECD nations. yo fool, economics is an art not a science. and the USSR didn't collapse because of economic reasons, though that is generally believed, it collapsed because of an internal revolt of top governmental officials specifically in the military and KGB, as well as disruptive reform policies of Gorbachev and Yeltsin. THe ussr didnt have a healthy economy, but that was not the reason for its demise. similarly the US economy could be more stable, however the US position as superpower is not in any serious jeopardy. :::Actually, I'm right. The USSR collapsed because the Soviet public no longer had any trust in it. The USSR National Debt was through the roof, all lines of credit had run out, and the Soviet public was not prepared to hold tight through Gorbachev's painful economic reform, and the USSR collapsed. Also, the USSR didn't have the option of forcing foreign lenders to prop up its' public debt as the US does. btw, personal insults are out of place on Wikipedia. --User:Ce garcon 11:05, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC) Ruy Lopez, you seem to only equate techonological advancement with a higher standard of living and/or quality of life. Sorry to put it so bluntly, but this is just plain wrong. We have made leaps and bounds in the past 50 years in such fields as space travel, aviation, telecommunications, etc. and although these were rapid and useful changes, they did not change the overall quality of life of the average citizen(although someone could argue this point for telecommunications). Also, I read a report that stated the average European didn't live as well as the average Roman(circa height of Roman Empire) unitl the mid 18th century. I believe no one here would argue that we made scientific progress of no consequence from the 2nd to 18th centuries. User:Interslice I would like to object to the Southeast being the center for medical research. This is so completely far from true. Raleigh-Durham does have a large amount of medical research, but this is MUCH smaller than that of California, Boston, Washington DC mmetro, and Texas. I would like to see that changed to something like the southeast economy is more heavily dependent on medical research. The way it is stated now, it sounds like all the medical research in the United States goes on in place like Atlanta, Birmingham, and Research Triangle, which is far from the truth. == Protection == I unprotected the page only for it to explode into an even larger edit war. Do I need to protect it again, or can you guys discuss it? Andre">User:Andrevan (User_talk:Andrevan)A 18:03, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC) :Please protect it again. It's obvious to all that VeryVerily has no intention of discussing anything or even obeying the three-revert rule. User:Shorne 18:44, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC) :Don't protect. It makes no sense. User:Anthony DiPierro User:Anthony_DiPierro/warning 15:47, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC) Protection in my eyes, are, in a sense, only another way and excuse of/for censorship. BOYCOT THE RESTRAINMENTS!--User:OleMaster 10:15, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) =="Popular Vote"?== This line "he President is elected to a four-year term by the Electoral College carried out through the process of a nation-wide popular vote." makes it sound like the popular vote is nationwide not statewide. I suggest something like "The president is elected to a four-year term by the Electoral College based on popular votes at the State level" or something to that effect, and giving a note that a more detailed explanation can be given by reading the artilce on the US Electoral College (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Electoral_College"). How does that ound? I just read it and thought that that sentance was just plain misleading! == FSM is NOT an insular area == OK, folks. The Federated States of Micronesia is NOT an insular area. It is an Independent nation in free association with the USA via the Compact of Free Association that was signed in 1986. Title 1, Article 1, Sec. 111 of the Compact of Free Association clearly says: ''The peoples of the Marshall Islands and the Federated States of Micronesia, acting through the Governments established under their respective Constitutions, are self-governing.'' [http://www.fsmlaw.org/compact/t01art01.htm] - User:Hoshie 09:14, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC) == Class == I have added an extra paragraph under the sub-heading 'Class'. This shows the income inequality within the USA, which was missing in the original. :The article already refers to social stratification and income inequality (the Gini coefficient), and I don't think one study by one economist should be in this article. There is a subarticle Social structure of the United States for more detailed analysis. User:VeryVerilyUser talk:VeryVerily 19:17, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't see that link. I agree with the delete. The graph that was with that material is remarkably hard to interpret. However, a short summary of the distribution of wealth is appropriate despite existance of a more detailed article. User:Fred Bauder 23:11, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC) == Edits to this article == This article has about 2000 edits that in order to study its history easily we almost definitely need a "1000" added to the options on "which number do you want the edits to be studied one at a time". I did it with 500 and I got 4 pages. Any comments?? User:66.245.31.111 01:55, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC) == Grammar and technical issues == ''"The United States of America consists of fifty states with limited autonomy in which federal law takes precedence over state law. In general, matters that lie entirely within state borders are the exclusive concern of state governments."'' Not to nit-pick, but "United States" is plural, not singular. Further, "state" is a synonym for "country" or "nation". Shouldn't this read more like, "The United States of America currently number fifty, each with limited autonomy. All states [aka ''nations''] lie within America [aka ''the Americas''] and are united (hence, 'United States of America') into a federation in which federal law takes precedence over state law. In general, matters that lie entirely within state borders are the exclusive concern of state governments and not the federal republic." A bit more cumbersome, but more technically accurate. It would also be interesting to know why the United States of America all have names, but the federal republic itself does not. Why in 200+ years has no one bothered to think of a name for the empire? This might be an important issue from an historical perspective. Perhaps this is what led to "United States of America" being used in the singular, rather than the more correct plural. Still, you'd think somewhere along the line, someone would have thought of giving one name to the collective whole of the United States of America, rather than just falling back on the description all the time. --User:Corvun 19:30, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) :Actually in the sense in which it is taken as the subject of the above-mentioned sentence it is singular. If you're not sure consider which of the following sounds right to you: :*The United States of America is a sovereign state :*The United States of America are a sovereign state :Essentially, when we think of the "United States of America" as a country, it is singular. When we think of it as a grouping of 50 states, it is plural. And almost always we use "Untied States of America" to mean the country. Also, it is just incorrect to say that each state is a separate nation. User:Jongarrettuk 20:11, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) :I agree. I mean, "United States of America", how can that be a name of a single country? Let's take the example of the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the United Mexican States, and give it a real name. ;) Anyway, historically, "The United States of America" is singular, and in the past, mostly before Lincoln's little tantrum, it tended to be referred to as "''these'' United States" but that was mostly informal. I guess the best answer is: What does the Constitution say? --User:Golbez 21:57, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC) ::Ummmm. The best answer is what do people normally say. I honestly don't know what the constitution says, but demotic usage in 2004 is more important now than usage in a formal document drawn up in the 1780s. User:Jongarrettuk 22:23, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) I suppose y'all are right, in that language is defined by usage. If people speak of the "United States" as a singular entity, then the grammar should reflect that. Same with the states themselves being called "states" even though they aren't actually nations or countries in and of themselves. It just all seems like one huge linguist's nightmare to me. Perhaps I'm being too analytical, and perhaps I shouldn't be expecting politically-defined uses of terms to make grammatical or etymological sense. --User:Corvun 22:57, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC) ::Actually, an etymological examination might be helpful here. Instead of focusing on the plural "States" in the term, let's look at "United". It derives from the latin unum meaning one. Thus "united" is to be made one. Thus, the plural states have been made into one, singular, entity. Aside from the informal "these United States" the term "United States" has not usually been used to describe the states as a group. The Constitution iteslf is not totally clear about this, but the Articles of Confederation state that "United States of America" is the style of the "confederacy", that is the national government itself. It is interesting also to note that the Constitution while not specifically assigning the style of the national government, uses "the several States" when referring to them as a group, rather than "the United States". ::: Six of one half dozen of the other. I vote status quo. btw, whoever wrote the above and didn't sign his name is a big fat [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/blowhard blowhard]. User:MPS 18:23, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) I think the current terminology should stay and I reject Corvun's proposed change. Yes, it is a giant linguist's nightmare, but it arises from the complex legal history of the United States. The problem is that the states always saw themselves as separate sovereigns from the very beginning (because the Crown constituted each of them separately), and modern American constitutional law continues to reflect that. Today, the weird legal fiction we operate under is ''dual'' sovereignty. Each American is a citizen of both their state of residence and of the federal sovereign. Each state is a separate sovereign which just happens (by virtue of ratifying the Constitution) to have consented to giving up bits and pieces of its sovereignty to the federal government. But as far as external nations are concerned, they see the federal government because one of the powers granted to the federal government is power over external affairs. As for the nation issue, even though the states continue to exist as separate legal entities, their conception of themselves as separate nations has long since withered away, and most Americans would agree that the United States effectively is a single nation. The major disagreement would be from Native Americans, who view each of their tribes as continuing to exist as autonomous nation-states, under the direct control of the larger federal sovereign. Also, if you look at the U.S. Constitution, both the Preamble and Article II repeatedly and consistently refer to "the United States of America." From the surrounding wording, it is clear that the Founders were referring to a single legal entity and believed they were constituting such an entity. So "the United States of America" ''is'' the legal name of the federal government. There are also many sections in the United States Code which refer to "the United States of America." --User:Coolcaesar 20:49, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) * They are referred to in both the Constitution and other documents as "the United States" because before 1787, they were semi-independent. This is where the Americans clouded the definitions of state and nation that the rest of the world successfully differentiates. The Constitution was the coming together of states that minted their own currency, engaged in trade wars with each other, refused to extradite criminals just because they happened to cross a state line, etc. into a "Union" hence how they became the "United." Up until the Civil War (especially in the South) is was thought that a state could easily withdraw if they didn't agree with the direction the Constitution was being torn into. South Carolina attempted to get out in the 1830s, etc. The Constitution of the United States of America is named as such simply because at first 13 states came together to agree to it. This was at time when New England was thinking about leaving the Articles of Confederation and creating an entity from New York to Maine. When sections of the American contintent west of the Appalachians were planning or trying to start their own little Republics (and some Kingdoms). If the states hadn't come together and decided to lay down a new document for their confederation, and instead persisted after Annapolis to exist under the "Articles of Confederation" from 1775, most likely the union would have fallen shortly after 1800 (if not sooner) and today we would see maps with other more localized confederations of the 50 states (which who knows if there would even be 50). Your conceptualization of inter-state relations leading up to the 1787 constitution is limited. A few delegates getting miffed would have changed the last three centuries of world history in ways we can hardly imagine. —User:ExplorerCDT 21:01, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) I hold a bachelor's degree in history from the most prestigious public university in the United States. I am well-aware of all of the facts you just mentioned, especially the delicate fragility of the Union throughout its first century. I am also familiar with all the diverse what-if scenarios. I do not have all day to write on talk pages. I did not think it was necessary to rehash the convoluted details of two centuries of American history just to explain how we got to our present pigpen of legal fictions and political realities. But thanks for doing that for me. When I said "wording" above, I was referring to the consistent use of the definite article, "the," rather than the plural demonstrative adjective, "these," in the Constitution. But you did clarify something I neglected, the task of explaining why the Constitution has to refer to ''states'' which are ''united,'' as opposed to, say, "the United State." --User:Coolcaesar 08:11, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Vandalism protection == I know the vandalism is now infrequent, but is it necessary? I don't think so since so many people watch this page anyway... --User:AllyUnion User talk:AllyUnion 20:31, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC) == Republicans and religious Jews == Excuse me. In the "Politics" section, the following sentence appears: :The Republicans generally receive more funding and support from business groups, religious Christians and Jews, and rural Americans, while the Democratic party receives more support from labor unions and minority ethnic groups. In the history, User:216.229.90.10 sliced out the phrase "and Jews" and then User:Mackensen promptly reverted it. Now, I'm a little confused. Historically, when Jews are considered as a voting bloc, they tend to lean Democratic. However, this analysis has always considered Jews as a single ethnic class and not separated out religious Jews from non-religious Jews. Therefore, my question: Does anyone have evidence that religious Jews tend to vote Republican (or Democratic)? — User:DLJessup 21:28, 2004 Dec 30 (UTC) == Social Issues == I added some more information about the incarceration/prison situation in the US. Feel free to verify if you need to, I tried to include all necessary sources though some of the math you'll have to check yourself :P. --User:Benapgar 09:22, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) == What about Indians and slaves == I was reading the article and was really surprised that it doesn't mention the fate of Native Americans anywhere (except the state of being of descendants today). Neither does it mention the slavery part of the history (except by using the word enslaved when speaking about slaves' descendants today). I don't want to rush into editing, because may be this issues was already brought forward here and wanted to ask first. Are these issues considered minor irrelevant details, unworthy of inclusion into the main article? Or is it just an unfortunate omission? User:Paranoid 01:10, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC) Pretty much every country at one point had slavery, there were also many that had the original inhabitants forced out of the lands to make way for other people. I don't see why it has to be mentioned. That is a history question, not a current events question. : I just added a bit about slavery and the Civil War to the history. I feel that the Civil War (and by association slavery) caused fundamental changes in America, and it needs to be in the summary. -- User:Dpark 23:16, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Infobox == Is there something wrong? The infobox doesn't align to the right.--User:Jerryseinfeld 20:18, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC) ==Should the "Social issues" section be removed?== Why is the US the only country with "social issues" mentioned in the blurb? Is the US the only country with "social issues"? This puts wikipedia's supposed non-bias in doubt in my opinion. --Anonymous :Then add it for other countries. Sheesh, the lengths people will go through to find bias here. You are part of wikipedia, so be part of the solution. Though the section could perhaps be managed a little differently. --User:Golbez 05:15, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC) ::So I'm going to add "social issues" for 120 or so other countries? I think not. I don't think that social issues should be included at all, but I won't get rid of it. -- Anonymous ::Even adding them for ''one'' other country would be better than nothing -- or maybe you prefer complaining to contributing. -- User:Derek Ross | User talk:Derek Ross 22:17, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC) 1. The "social issues" section is too esoteric to be included on a country's main page. When I go to a country's main page, I want to know about geography, history, government, etc.--the things you would see in a well-written encyclopedia article of this type. If I want an overview of social issues in the United States, I'll look at Social issues in the United States. Including such a section on this page makes as much sense as including a large section on Banking in the United States. Include a link; the people who are interested will click. 2. The "social issues" section violates NPOV by selective inclusion. The section is basically a laundry list of complaints and unresolved issues. Every country has unresolved social issues. The singling out of one country to include a section of this type violates NPOV in the same way as singling out one country to include a "Great Achievements" section. Furthermore, the social issues themselves are far too complex, multidimensional, and controversial to be summarized properly in the space provided. (And the section is already the longest one on the U.S. page.) These issues need and deserve their own pages (which they have). In short, the section is inappropriate and biased. I believe the section should be removed and the included information moved to the appropriate sub-pages. User:68.46.123.33 23:41, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) ==Article title== Shouldn't this article be properly entitled "United States of America" instead of "United States"? User:129.143.4.68 ===United StatesUnited States of America & United States (disambiguation)United States=== :The second half of this proposal was not made sufficiently clear, so it has been added to the title -- User:Curps 23:27, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) The reason is quite simple: I believe that, although the countries should be referred to by their shortened names rather than full, official names, in this context the term ''United States'' is highly ambiguous. I believe it would be better to move all of the United States to their respective official names and list them on top of the disambiguation page at United States (after it is moved from United States (disambiguation). User:HalibuttUser talk:Halibutt 19:12, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC) *You gotta be kidding. You sure you want to open this can of worms again? Oppose. User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 19:19, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC) *Weak Oppose; While not the official name the ''United States'' is a nice little abbreviation which is gonna offend no American - if you change this then you should really change United Kingdom to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland --User:NeilTarrant 19:36, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Supportthe move since it's the country's proper name (but not so formal as to be an affected use), but I wouldn't move the disambiguation page. 98% of the time ''United States'' means the U.S. of A. ''—User:Mzajac  User talk:Mzajac  2005-01-22 16:54 Z'' **Oppose, since I'm not in favour of making it a disambiguation page. ''—User:Mzajac  User talk:Mzajac  2005-01-22 16:54 Z'' *Support, for the reasons Michael Z. cited - User:Guettarda 19:57, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *I'd be OK with it, despite having adjusted many links from variations, but, looking at United States (disambiguation), I don't see any ambiguity. I guess I oppose unless a stronger case is made for contemporary "ambiguity". And why move it if United States still links there?Oppose both. Still haven't seen a specific case made for any contemporary ambiguity. User:Niteowlneils 23:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) User:Niteowlneils 20:03, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) **Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) User:Niteowlneils 20:56, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Support: even the disambiguation page has the link United States so that the link shows as "United States of America". I've always promoted the use of official/full names and redirecting common names to it. Ambiguity isn't very valid point since "United States" is pretty ubiquitous to "The United States of America", but I support the move nonetheless. User:Cburnett 20:20, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Strong Oppose. Definitely not. User:Proteus User_talk:Proteus 20:33, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Strong oppose. Pointless move. --User:Tony Sidaway|User talk:Tony Sidaway 21:18, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Please can this be dicussed at the article before a move is requested? User:Violetriga User_talk:violetriga 21:42, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Strongly Oppose because I believe this proposal is being made in extreme bad faith. Not only is it being proposed to move United StatesUnited States of America, but then to also move United States (disambiguation)United States. In other words, the page at United States would become a disambiguation page. This second proposal is frankly preposterous. The title and introduction of this section did not properly reflect this second proposal at all. Since both moves are being proposed as a package deal, I would urge those who voted to support to reconsider. -- User:Curps 23:27, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) ** I did not have any hidden agenda, anti-american sentiments or any bad faith when I proposed the move. Please provide any proof for such bad intentions. Or withdraw your comment. As to the reasons why to move the dismabiguation page to United States - I stumbled upon that page while searching for United States of Brasil. Then I realised, that while there are at least three important states to use the term "United States", wikipedia promotes only one of them. IMHO this is simply not right. Please note that I'm not proposing to move the article on the United Mexican States to United States. I only want all country articles to follow the same rules. That's all. User:HalibuttUser talk:Halibutt 09:48, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC) *** See my comments in the separate section below. As to your reasons to move the disambiguation page: it is established Wikipedia practice that when one meaning very greatly predominates in public usage and perception, then we do not detour through a disambiguation page. Please, would you agree to move Poland (disambiguation) to Poland? And which "three important states" are you referring to? "The United States of Europe" is an obsolete proposed name that was never in any actual use, and the new permanent name is European Union. "United States of Brazil" has not been used in 37 years, and was mostly used only in Portuguese and hardly ever in English, and even then only in formal diplomatic usage and never in common usage. As for Mexico, it's called "United Mexican States" in English, not "United States of Mexico", so there is no ambiguity... and as someone has already pointed out, ''Estados Unidos'' in Mexican Spanish unambiguously refers to the USA. It is stretching credulity to the limit and beyond to claim that ''the term "United States" is highly ambiguous'', as you do in the introduction to this requested move. -- User:Curps 22:08, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) * Oppose for reasons stated. User:Raul654 23:32, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC) * Oppose unless only the first half is done. --User:SPUI 23:35, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC) * Oppose. This would affect many redirects and dependent pages and a huge number of links. User:Jonathunder 23:56, 2005 Jan 24 (UTC) * Oppose: United States should not be a disambig page. User:Cburnett 00:26, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) * Oppose. Reasons reasonably statated by previous voters. 02:49, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC) * Oppose. Reasons stated above. User:Mackensen User_talk:Mackensen 06:01, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) * Strongly oppose. This has been covered before, but America is clearly the primary topic for English speakers (and even Spanish speakers; the term ''Estados Unidos'' in Mexico refers to the U.S. of A.). User:Austin Hair (User talk:Austin Hair&Special:emailuser/Austin Hair) 06:07, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC) * Support both as a package deal or failing that, just the first —User:Ashley Y 07:29, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC) * Support - though I think that the same should be applied to United Kingdom - User:Estel User_talk:Estel 10:19, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC) * Oppose - IMO the ideal situation would be that the page is called United States of America and then United States redirects to it. However the status quo is preferable to this proposal which would cause problems both for linking and for people that type United Status into the search box. There's hardly anybody who would respond to "United States" by saying, "which one?" User:Mattrix 10:42, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) * Oppose with extreme prejudice. United States is used unambiguously on literally thousands of pages, which shows there's no need to move the article. And the latter half of the move would mean having to change all of those links to avoid a disambig page, which is beyond stupid. (This vote is intended to be read as an insult.) User:SjorfordUser talk:Sjorford 16:33, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Oppose, unless someone knows of another United States more deserving of the article name. Xezbeth">User:Xezbeth 16:39, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC) *Oppose so much that I also oppose the next page move request made by this user. -- User:Netoholic User talk:Netoholic 16:43, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC) *Strongly Oppose. This is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. User:Carrp 16:47, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) *Oppose there is a clear reference to the disambig page at the top and this creates more problems than it solves 19:23, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) **In the proud tradition of John Kerry, I supported the proposal before I opposed it, but given Halibutt's clarification of the proposal, I once again Support the idea. And why not call the country by its proper name? There is some sort of a weird undertone that this is anti-American and thus must be opposed...Actually more than an undertone now that User:Sjorford has written: ''This vote is intended to be read as an insult''. (And the insult is due to what...accuracy? Wikipedia is in bad shape when accuracy falls into second place behind rather odd ideas of nationalism). If it were my country I'd want it have it placed under the correct name. It's not quite the same as putting the UK under The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - it's more like moving the UK to the United Kingdom. Has the shot been called - '''Don't mess with the US'''? Shall we soon see Wikipedians disappearing into [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiki-Gitmo]. Scary stuff. ''Weird''... User:Guettarda 20:08, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) The above is a history of the discussion at wikipedia:requested moves. ====Bad faith==== Halibutt, At Wikipedia talk:Requested_moves#Need_help you are now claiming that you never proposed the second move (United States (disambiguation)United States). But this is simply not true. Let's look at your Special:Contributions/Halibutt: * 19:12, 24 Jan 2005 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Requested moves (''→January 24'') * 19:08, 24 Jan 2005 (hist) (diff) United States * 19:08, 24 Jan 2005 (hist) (diff) United States (disambiguation) You edited both pages at the exact same time (19:08). You added to United States (disambiguation), so that page reads: So you are indeed proposing United States (disambiguation)United States, and sending people to comment and vote on it at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Yet on the Wikipedia:Requested moves page itself, the header reads only: * United StatesUnited States of America The header makes no mention of the second move at all, and your intro text mentions the second move only in a disguised and confusing way: :''I believe that… in this context the term United States is highly ambiguous. I believe it would be better to move all of the United States to their respective official names and list them on top of the disambiguation page at United States (after it is moved from United States (disambiguation).'' You seem to be trying to trick people into voting for something without realizing what they are voting for. This is extreme bad faith. -- User:Curps 20:45, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) :But I did not list that move on the RM for a good reason - I wanted to decide those matters separately, one by one. By changing the vote I proposed you made the users misinterpret my intentions. Full stop. User:HalibuttUser talk:Halibutt 11:19, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) ::Then why did you add the "move" header to United States (disambiguation) (simultaneously to adding the header to United States) if you did not want this move to be done? Also, your intro text (quoted above) mentioned the second move in a way that certainly seemed to imply that it would be done. If there was indeed confusion about your intentions, you must admit that you yourself greatly contributed to that confusion. Since there is a new vote now, let's move on. -- User:Curps 21:29, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) == New vote: swap "United States" with "United States of America" == Though the WP:RM was a mangled mess, I'll propose a new vote here. The vote entails: *Swapping United States with United States of America *Change all redirects pointing to United States to United States of America Consequences: *Article content found at United States of America *All other redirects point to United States of America *United States becomes a redirect to United States of America *United States (disambiguation) is unchanged ===Support swap=== No discussion here, only votes. See below for discussion # User:Cburnett 22:31, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC) # User:GruntUser talk:Grunt European Union 22:32, 2005 Jan 25 (UTC) # User:Estel User_talk:Estel 10:09, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) # User:HalibuttUser talk:Halibutt 14:40, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) # User:ExplorerCDT 15:33, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) # User:SECProto 15:55, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) # User:Mzajac 21:01, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC) # User:Heimdal 11:23, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) Acronym "U.S.A." would also do. # User:Timrollpickering 15:59, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) # User:Guettarda 19:40, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) # User:JayjgUser_talk:Jayjg 00:59, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC) # User:Trilobite 06:52, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) I've never understood why it's at United States. # User:Refdoc 22:25, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC) # User:Calmypal 17:44, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC) # User:Thryduulf 17:25, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) Like Triolbite, I've always expected it to be at United States of America. # User:Rainer 10:46, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) I'm thinking the same as Thryduulf. # User:Ddye 00:08, 19 May 2005 (UTC) ===Oppose swap=== No discussion here, only votes. See below for discussion #User:Proteus User_talk:Proteus 10:41, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:Tony Sidaway|User talk:Tony Sidaway 11:25, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:Carrp 15:26, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:SjorfordUser talk:Sjorford 15:37, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:Jonathunder 15:42, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC) # Use Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). Google just [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22United+States%22+-%22United+States+of+America%22 "United States"] = 31,700,000 hits — [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22United+States+of+America%22 "United States of America"] = 10,500,000 hits. -- User:Netoholic User talk:Netoholic 16:50, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC) #User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 17:20, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) #User:Jguk 21:08, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:Violetriga User_talk:violetriga 21:16, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) #Not unless we move United Kingdom to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. User:NeutralityUser talk:Neutrality 21:20, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) #User:JiangUser talk:Jiang 08:22, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) #Xezbeth">User:Xezbeth 09:53, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC) # User:Austin Hair (User talk:Austin Hair&Special:emailuser/Austin Hair) 10:59, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC) #User:Niteowlneils 22:52, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) #User:Minesweeper 03:29, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) #User:Milkmandan 19:06, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC) #User:Flyers13 22:08, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC). Agree with User:Neutrality. #User:Hajor 20:56, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC). #User:Daniel Quinlan 20:34, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC) #User:Funnyhat 20:32, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) #--User:Jleon 20:38, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC) #User:Dpark 19:57, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) (Late vote, but whatever) #User:Srl 09:14, 28 May 2005 (UTC) Later vote ===Other vote=== No discussion here, only votes. See below for discussion # User:Curps 10:06, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) (either this or status quo is fine) ===Discussion=== Another option would be to swap "United States" with "U.S.A.". That would look better, imo. Sorry but "United States" sounds too much like "United Kingdom". User:129.143.4.68 I oppose on the grounds that it's ''far'' too early for a vote; a change like this could do with a bit more (calm) discussion first. I'm actually fairly neutral on whether this would be a good thing. User:SjorfordUser talk:Sjorford 15:44, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) * To Netoholic: How many of those "United States" hits on google are for "United States of Mexico" (10,100) or other countries using "United States" in their names? Also, how many of those are for "United States Army" (2,110,000) or "United States Marine Corps" (394,000) or "United States Air Force" (1,130,000) or "United States Navy" (1,020,000), or "United States Department of State" (and other cabinet departments) or other organizations or corporations (United States Steel - 90,700) that just use the "United States" part of the "United States of America"? Or for phrases like "President of the United States" (3,940,000) or "Supreme Court of the United States" (670,000)? Eventually (despite your blanket attempt to say there are more U.S. references than U.S. of A. hits), those totals (like the pennies I so hate to have in my pocket) do add up. —User:ExplorerCDT 17:06, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) **I think your examples (except perhaps Mexico :| ) proove the point. If government stations and military forces don't use "United States of America" in their name, then it is just more evidence that the longer name is not used in common speech or writing - even to the government agencies themselves. The United States self-identifies more frequently using the shorter name. -- User:Netoholic User talk:Netoholic 17:15, 2005 Jan 26 (UTC) ***(agreeing with Netoholic--written before he posted the above, but caught in an edit conflict) Formations such as "President of the United States" or "Supreme Court of the United States" (as opposed to "President of the United States of America" or "Supreme Court of the United States of America") should count as evidence for the shortened form. Even if you eliminate all the non-governmental incidents (like U.S. Steel), there'd still be an overwhelming difference. But beyond Google, how about some common sense: if you go to any English-speaking part of the world and ask what "United States" refers to--the response would be nearly unanimous. None of the other "United States" are commonly referred to as such except in limited situations where the context makes the reference clear. User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 17:20, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) ***I disagree that google is a good measure of what to name an article. Especially when expanding the name of an article. Searching for "United States" or "United States of America" will still land this article in both result sets. This is the *only* reason given in the convention for caring about search engines and it's null & void. The convention only proposes to use common names to ensure it gets listed on search engines. Again, with this move, this is a null & void point: it will be in both results by same virtue "United States Army" is. Netholic, you're using the naming convention (along with a lot of people I see) for purposes other than intended. User:Cburnett 21:58, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ****''The convention only proposes to use common names to ensure it gets listed on search engines.'' Nonsense. From the third paragraph of Wikipedia:Naming conventions: ''Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature.'' No mention whatsoever there of search engines. "United States" is unambiguously recognized by most English-speaking people (and even those with only a limited familiarity with English). "United States" is the simpler name and is easier to link to than "United States of America". User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 22:05, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) *****What you quoted from WP:NC is a summary and you didn't link to the fuller explanation at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). The first reason listed is for listing on external search engines. User:Cburnett 22:21, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ******While it is not readily apparent, the subpage, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), was originally developed primarily to address the names of people (as can be seen where it is linked to from Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Use common names of persons and things). Back in August 2002, Mav created the subpage by transferring and editing the section then labelled "Use common names of persons" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Naming_conventions&diff=138696&oldid=138694]. In a later edit, Mav merged what had been a separate section labelled "Use simple titles" into the new Common Names subpage [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Naming_conventions&diff=138699&oldid=138696]. Although there is certainly some overlap, this is more clearly a case of "use simple titles" rather than strictly "use common names". Adding "of America" does not help to clarify the topic of the article, as "United States" is unambiguous to nearly all speakers of English; it merely makes a longer and more difficult to link to title. While you dismiss WP:NC as merely a summary, it is the primary page and the clearest statement of basic naming conventions. User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 23:01, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) *******Then why did Netholic use Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names) as his rationale? :) User:Cburnett 23:12, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ********Well, I suppose because the somewhat related issues of simple title and common name got conflated into a single convention. User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 23:23, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) In addition to 'common names', I'd be extremely reluctant to move any page with more than 500 incoming links, at least until the paging feature is added to the 'what links here' pages. It was only by luck that I found a broken redir to Washington, DC caused by its weak consensus move. User:Niteowlneils 20:36, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) :It's a page swap and can't create a double redirect unless there was already one there. User:Cburnett 21:50, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::No, this is incorrect. If there are any redirects to the United States, when that is moved to United States of America, those redirects would become double-redirects and would no longer work. User:BkonradUser talk:Bkonrad 22:10, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC) :Imagine my surprise when I entered "United States" into the search category expecting to find an article on the Republic of the United States of Brazil (what Brazil was called pre-1968), and suddenly finding an article about a ragtag collection of 50 states that are scattered across the most southerly third of North America! Let's keep things simple and where people expect to find them, shall we? User:Jguk 21:13, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::Er, the most southerly third of North America includes Mexico and Central America. I've always suspected this newfangled "Wikipedia" thing was unreliable. Or maybe this is indeed something new and notable and we need to create United States (southerly third) and add it to the disambiguation page. I look forward to your original research :-) -- User:Curps 21:35, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) :Mexico's in Central America - North America is Canada, the United States, St Pierre et Miquelon, Greenland and (arguably) Bermuda. Of course, two of the ragtag areas aren't in the southerly third of North America. One's a former outermost province of Russia, and another one, properly called the Sandwich Islands isn't in a continent at all, User:Jguk 22:06, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC) :: Mexico is a Latin American country, but it's definitely in North America. Geophysically speaking, the continent ends at the Panama Canal, so all of Central America is in North America, too. ''—User:Mzajac  User talk:Mzajac  2005-01-22 16:54 Z'' :::Central America is in North America, Mexico is ''not'' in Central America. e.g. ''Flora of North America North of Mexico'' [http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195112466/qid=1106855091/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-0929961-2739237?v=glance&s=books] We have the United States Air Force (USAF) not the United States of America Air Force (USAAF), United States Postal Service (USPS), not United States of America Postal Service (USAPS), President of the United States (POTUS), not President of the United States of America (POTUSA)...even the Constitution itself makes repeated references to the "Congress of the United States" instead of the "Congress of the United States of America". Using "United States" is perfectly correct and most common--User:JiangUser talk:Jiang 08:26, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) "America", "US", "USA" are all in as common usage as "United States" alone. Why pick one and not the others? The name of the country (or federation, if you prefer) is the United States of America. Isn't ''accuracy'' supposed to be of some value in an encyclopaedia? Why is this even an issue? Do the people who are so passionate about this thing want to be called "United Statesians" rather than Americans? Fine with me - I'd be happy to get my continent back. User:Guettarda 19:53, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC) :''Do the people who are so passionate about this thing want to be called "United Statesians" rather than Americans?'' Actually, I'd rather not be called either, what with being Ireland and all. User:Proteus User_talk:Proteus 12:57, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) United Kingdom does not need to be moved to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Ever heard of the UKGBNI? The full title is so unwieldy that there's not even a decent acronym for it - neither would you hear it often in official speeches. On the other hand, "United States of America" and "U.S.A." are commonly used, and widely referred to. User:Heimdal 11:27, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) You know, they tend to use, "Miss United States" --User:AllyUnion User talk:AllyUnion 12:37, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) :sounds like good advice to me:) User:Jguk 13:17, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC) There is a Straw Poll taking place on Wikipedia talk:Requested moves on where votes for "Requested Moves" should be placed. As this page was listed on the RM page and the debate was moved to here, the people who voted here, have practical experience of the issue and you might like to contribute to the straw poll on the RM page. User:Philip Baird Shearer 11:48, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) Quote: Title 28 United States Code Section 3002(15) "United States means - (A) a Federal Corporation. Bouviers: "The republic whose organic law is the constitution adopted by the people of the thirteen states which declared their independence of the government of Great Britain on the fourth day of July, 1776." Richard Fuselier — Special:Contributions/216.78.8.110 User talk:216.78.8.110 : 28 USC 3002(15) does not create a legal definition of the term "United States". That subsection simply defines the words "United States" ''when they are used in that particular chapter'' of the United States Code. This is simply a way of saving words in the remainder of that chapter of the U.S. Code. User:Mateo SA | User talk:Mateo SA 01:53, May 26, 2005 (UTC) == More American History to be added == I recently watched the film "The Corporation" and it repeated a little remembered story about an attempted coup in the US - I thought you might want to include it somewhere in the American History Section, and perhaps have links from Fascism section as well. J P Morgan and a group of financiers were prepared to spent up to $300 Million in 1934 to stage a coup, using over 500,000 ex-servicemen. The plot was foiled [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler [Smeadley D Butler]] testifying in Congress. The below quote from http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/morgan3.htm - I don't know how correct the whole article is regarding it's point of view, however the film repeated details from this page. FRom what I can see it's OK to quote from that site if attributed to them http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/intro.htm#fdr -----quote from page------ On Nov. 21, The New York Times, a paper that Heywood Broun once described as ``black with the shoepolish of Morgan,'' took the lead in this campaign, with a front-page two-column article under the headline: ``General Butler Bares `Fascist Plot' to Seize Government by Force.'' Having already put the words `fascist plot' in quotes, the paper led with: ''A plot of Wall Street interests to overthrow President Roosevelt and establish a fascist dictatorship backed by a private army of 500,000 ex-soldiers and others, was charged by Major General Smedley D. Butler, retired Marine Corps officer, who appeared yesterday before the House Un-American Activities Committee, which began hearings on the charges.'' -----end quote------ == The Great Satan == While "colourful" and a joke to some degree, the addition in the names' section was not without good reason. The article needs at least a short section on foreign policy and perception of the USA by others - which is the section such a name would obviously seamlessly fit in... User:Refdoc 21:53, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC) :Even as a joke, "The Great Satan" is not a "good example" of the range of responses to US foreign policy. Another example showing "uninhibited admiration" might balance the article and restore NPOV, but I really don't think that giving a couple of extreme examples helps very much. I would strike the example. User:Shoaler 17:22, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::As it is the joke bit was putting it into the first line - to see how long it would last. The place now is meant very seriously and is in my opinion a necessary addition. There are few countries which provoke such massive reactions in ''all directions'' - well maybe Israel. The Soviet Union at its heyday - maybe. Nazi Germany - only towards the negative I would presume. :: "The Great Satan" is not just a colourful epithet - well it is in Western Eyes/Ears, but the phrase it is part of the political discourse in the Middle East and it ''neeeds'' to be mentioned if the impact and the image of the USA foreign policies is discussed. I do not understand why you would want to balance it. It is quite a unique thing and there is probably no 'balancing' epithet around - unless you want to become all contrived. User:Refdoc 22:53, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC) I think it is utterly irrelevant whether people in the USA like being called "Great Satan" or not as the paragraph is about ''thh image of the USA abroad'', not about ''the impact of the image abroad''. If you feel this is a necessary addition - reaction of the USA population to the perception - positive and negative - aborad,then it should be addded in a more complete manner. User:Refdoc 09:49, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC) :To put in my two bits on this debate: As an American, I find that epithet to be extremely offensive, inflammatory, and inappropriate, as currently used in the article, and possibly in violation of Wikipedia style. With regard to what would be the appropriate context, I believe it should be put in the Anti-Americanism article, since the term "Great Satan" is simply the most extreme example of anti-Americanism. ::Does anti-americain sentiment not have direct bearing on international relations? I find it to be interesting, although I do not believe that america is the great satan, I believe the great satan is ignorance. :::As another American, I don't find it offensive at all. When a mentally disturbed person walks down the street muttering things, I don't worry "oh, he might be speaking the truth". In a like manner, for people in the Middle East to use a term in their own languages that translates to "Great Satan" says more to me about those people in the Middle East than it says anything about the world's oldest democracy. All sorts of people in the Middle East say all sorts of things. So what? But really, Great Satan deserves its own article, with copious references to and from articles about the current government in Iran which not only coined the phrase, but which is also despised by many of its own oppressed people. User:brassrat :There is no need to clog up a general article on the United States with such loaded terms. To put this in perspective, UK citizens would be offended if the British English page equated Received Pronunciation with being homosexual, which is a common perception in the United States (on Saturday Night Live, one comedian once said about Tony Blair: "Is he English?" and the other responded: "No, he's gay." [uproarious laughter]). :Frankly, I think Refdoc is nuts. But I'm too busy---with certain personal matters and with trying to cool down an edit war with another wacko on another page---to risk getting into an edit war on this one. :--User:Coolcaesar 09:18, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) I think it would be a lot better if you would not use personal attacks. Apart from this - If you have a look at the history, the article was already concerned with the image of the USA abroad. So I expanded on this and used the one most (in)famous term. It certainly appears a going concern rather than a matter for the lunatic fringe. Why else are gazillions of books and articles written on "Why do they hate us?"[http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0927/p1s1-wogi.html] and [http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=mozclient&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&q=%22Why+do+they+hate+us%22+] ? If this offends you or other Americans , than so be it. I have not said that ''I'' think so or that the term is ''Wikipedia endorsed'' or similar nonsense , but simply stated a fact - The USA arouse strong feelings abroad, positive + negative, the one most famous example is xyz" User:Refdoc 11:45, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) :As an American, I have no problem with such an inclusion. If folks abroad really do refer to the U.S. as "The Great Satan", this should be included in the article, even if it's only to be given a brief sentence. It isn't as though someone's trying to put an image of Uncle Sam with devil-horns at the top of the page. And even if he/she were, I wouldn't be offended, nor would I understand how anyone else could take offense to it. We're all just ''Homo sapiens'' after all; nationalities are incidental and meaningless. Countries and kingdoms and nations are only lines on maps anyway. It's not like they really mean anything. --User:Corvun 05:29, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC) == Deletion of talkpages == There is something profoundly wrong when people delete discussion from the talkpages, using as an explanation "leftist crap" User:Refdoc 00:39, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) :A 9-year old's thoughts on the President are not appropriate for this talk page, Refdoc. - User:Calmypal 01:04, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC) ::That isn't your decision to make, Calmypal. Even if the comment was in poor taste, it was relevant, as were the responses and the replies to the responses. Just as the comment itself may be "leftist crap", so is its removal "rightwing cowardice". Those of us who saw no reason to delete it can only be left to assume that something about the comment makes you extremely uncomfortable. Perhaps you know that the Bush administration ''is'' guilty of terrorism, and are uncomfortable with someone calling attention to this fact -- as it paints Bush's supporters as hypocrites for simultaneously supporting both this "war on terror" and the acts of terrorism commited by the Bush administration for which this "war" is a pathetically transparent guise, as well as (and more simply) supporters of terrorism. Normally I would make no such suggestion, but these constant acts of selective censorship lead to no other plausible conclusion. --User:Corvun 03:54, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Legal vs. Popular Names for National Leaders == I don't want to get into an edit war, but it seems to me that the proper reference for national leaders for all countries in Wikipedia should be their actual name, not their popular name (i.e., Richard Cheney vs. Dick Cheney). I know that the actual Wikipedia article is titled "Dick Cheney" and that's probably OK since that is how people will first think of him, but his legal name is Richard Cheney. In fact, this is the citation used in other reference materials (e.g., see [http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108121.html infoplease almanac United States entry]). User:Earpol 10:02, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) As far as I'm aware the concept of a "legal name" is not universal. In my country, for instance, my name is whatever I want to call myself. On US government figures, everybody calls Jimmy Carter by that name and everybody knows Dick Cheney by that name. --User:Tony Sidaway|User talk:Tony Sidaway 14:46, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) == Political Parties Vs. Political Ideologies == There is a difference between political parties and political ideologies. Ideologies compete for the same name space, but use the same words in a more technical sense. Also, ideologies occupy two dimensions, not one. Edit wars start when someone who doesn't understand these facts confuses an ideological term with a political term and decides it is "too general". --User:Dbabbitt 10:45, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC) There is some propaganda near the top about Russia and Bush that should be deleted. :I've posted a message at Image talk:Political Ideologies.png outlining some of my concerns about :Image:Political Ideologies.png. Figured that doesn't have much visibility, so I'm posting a note here. User:Rhobite 22:58, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC) :For the great reasons mentioned at Image talk:Political Ideologies.png, I'm moving it off the main page. --User:Dbabbitt 14:00, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC) == "United States" and "U.S." == There are specific usages for these terms. The abbreviation "U.S." should *only* be used as an adjective, such as "U.S. dollar." In noun form, the country must always be spelled out as "the United States." Never refer to the country as "the U.S.;" that may be common in slang usage, but it is considered improper in writing. :Abbreviations are a form of slang that can only be used as adjectives. Gotcha. Likewise, "Aren't I?" should be used instead of "Ain't I?", because the correct answer to the question would be "Yes, I are", and not the ungrammatical "Yes, I am" ("Ain't" being a variation on "Am't", the contraction of "am not"). See, because "ain't" is non-standard. :Call me crazy here, but if we're going to be so linquistically pedantic, we should at least strive for ''sensical'' pedantry. -- King of the Pedants, User:Corvun 00:58, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC) Corvun: The use of United States as a noun and U.S. as an adjective is standard in most style guides: NY Times, AP, Chicago Manual (used in book publishing), etc. Those of us who are professional copy editors and proofreaders like the distinction. Of course, we have a bigger bone to pick with Wikipedia: the substandard English found in many articles by contributors whose mother tongue is not English. Horrendous errors of syntax, grammar, spelling, and punctuation are ubiquitous. : You say that you are a copy editor and proofreader: so, edit the places where you see problems. that is the whole point about wikipedia, you contribute what you can. you don't say that you are an author, you say that you are a copy editor and proofreader. Otherwise, it is better that someone contribute even if they have some rough edges, if their contribution is otherwise an improvement. User:brassrat I do that, Brassrat—I often edit one English Wiki article each day to fix punctuation, syntax, and spelling. Some people take offense and revert my edits. (I also contribute articles in English, French, and German, and don't mind if someone alters my writing, especially in French and German.) :ok, that's fine, but of course i misunderstood because that's not what you wrote... see any parallels? :) Peace. User:Brassrat 14:51, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Move page == To United_States_Of_America ? :Er, no. See #New vote: swap \"United States\" with \"United States of America\". 19:14, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC) == Fix needed. == " The United States country also a collection of overseas territories and possessions around the world" SOrry I'm too tired to do this, can someone else please? Manty thanks. User:Rich Farmbrough 19:06, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Notes == In the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_of_America#Notes notes] section, it reads: "¹ In the English-speaking world, America has become synonymous with the nation of the United States while American refers to United States (U.S.) citizens; this is a standard usage not in only the U.S. itself, but also Australia." Why does it mention just Australia? I'm sure that heaps of countries use "American". Is it supposed to be like this? User:Rainer 10:31, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC) == Kilometers vs. Miles in Infobox == Wikipedia:Standardize_Spellings set a precedent that all info should have a bias toward the country that the article concerns. Shouldn't, therefore, the area of the United States be changed to miles, since this is the de facto system of the country? It's 5,984,686 sq. miles by the way. It's stupid, since the "English System" used in America is quite costly to scientists who have to convert. But that's the precedent we've set on Wikipedia and I think we should follow our precedents. User:Juppiter 20:22, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) I concur that square miles should be added. A lot of the people creating infobox templates have been inserting sq. km as a default unit on the end for the area field, which is kind of insensitive to us Americans. For one clever way to get around this and squeeze in miles along with kilometers, go look at the City infobox template as implemented on the Los Angeles page. --User:Coolcaesar 11:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) I wouldn't care, except I had 40+ people tell me that articles should be regionally biased. User:Juppiter 04:31, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) "Bias toward the country" means we don't say "This is an awful place", or other things like that. Things like distances and areas are generally part of factual information, which does not involve bias. The "metric system" is the worldwide standard measurement system. It is used by everyone outside the U.S., some people inside, and all scientists, pharmacists, etc. It is also the official measurement system in the U.S. The U.S. measurement system is used by some people inside the U.S. and no one outside it. So the question of units is not one of bias, but one of "Is this information ONLY for U.S. residents?" Certainly, include U.S. units as another option, but km and the like are what the whole world has standardized on, and what Wikipedia should use. -- User:Nowhither 23:34, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC) :The vast majority of people in the US have no idea how big a kilometer is, and the vast majority of the people outside the US have no idea how big a mile is. Unless the information is intended to be read only by one group or the other, we must include both. - User:Nat KrauseUser_Talk:Nat Krause 05:30, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) :''The U.S. measurement system is used by some people inside the U.S. and no one outside it.'' :Some people in the U.S. use the English (now better called the U.S. system, I suppose) system?? Like it or hate it, not only does nearly everyone (apart from recent immigrants) use the U.S. system, most people - certainly the great majority of native-born U.S. citizens - have no strong concept of the Metric system (they may know a km is shorter than a mile, but not by how much). Please don't understate the case. User:Moncrief 05:09, May 10, 2005 (UTC) Is there a reason we can't simply have both? Also, this little battle where people swap "500 km (300 miles)" for "300 miles (500 km)" is petty. It doesn't matter which is chosen, as long as it's consistent. User:Dpark 06:00, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) Yes, we should have both mi. and km. As of 2005, a large nation of 295 million people has not yet adopted the metric system. It's a fact, and we Americans still live in miles, degrees Fahrenheit, feet and inches. We can give ''both'' figures in U.S.-related articles. What's the problem? Mason.Jones :: It looks unprofessional to have both. That's why I thought spellings should be standardized. People insisted on making that about nationalism, unfortunately, so we're stuck looking like children spelling words all kinds of different ways. If that's the official policy of wikipedia, so should be using both miles and kilometers (and I say this purely out of spite, there is no reason why measurements should be standardized in what's more commonly used, but spellings should not. I think it's just the wikipedia aristocracy getting its way as usual. User:Juppiter 00:28, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::: I'd say it looks unprofessional to fail to provide the U.S. standard units in an article about the United States. I'm willing to grant that we should prefer metric in most (all?) articles. In fact, I'd say we should present metric first in this article as well, but completely omitting the units Americans are most comfortable with in an article about America seems inappropriate. I'm also in favor of standardizing on a single spelling style. (I'd prefer American, of course, since I'm American, and so is Wikipedia.) -- User:Dpark 01:23, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::: Also, here's the Wikipedia:Measurements Debate, for anyone who cares to look. This article should have miles, first and foremost. As a second option it should also have kilometers. It's absolutely ridiculous for it to only have a unit of measurement nobody but a tiny minority actually use in this country. User:DreamGuy 02:33, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) :If anything, it is ''more'' professional to have both since it serves both parties who use it. Everything in this article should use the American system and have kilometers in parentheses. --user:tomf688(User talk:Tomf688) 03:03, Apr 24, 2005 (UTC) Since no one seems to have any objections, I say we add U.S. units. I'll do it within a few days if no one else does so first. -- User:Dpark 15:33, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) Yes, it's the best option. Americans rarely use metric units (and often can't convert English units to metrics). Americans also prefer U.S. spellings such as ''honor'', ''capitalize'', and ''lackluster''—and would expect them in articles about New Orleans, Mariah Carey, and brownies. The Brits have long adopted metrics and are comfortable with them; the British spellings ''honour'', ''capitalise'' and ''lacklustre'' are standard in the U.K., and would be appropriate in articles about Liverpool, Elton John or Yorkshire pudding. The point: unlike other Wiki language sites, English Wikipedia can't standardize everything. English units are indispensable in U.S.-related articles. Use consistent spelling and punctuation within an article (official Wiki style), but with two big English-language groups sharing English Wikipedia, we should accommodate and not irritate.User:Mason.Jones 03:21, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) == Isolationism and Imperialism == there seems to be a revert/unrevert going on over the phrasing about US Foreign policy wavering between isolationism and imperialism. Although I suggest it be rephrased and expanded, from a historical view this can be judged as somewhat uncontroverted. There is a period essentially in the late 1880s and early 1900s where patterns commonly refered to as "Empire" where somewhat a part of US policy and there was even an "Anti-Imperial League" at the time (included Mark Twain, William James and Andrew Carnegie) over the Philippines. Of course, like anything there are counter-points and other views on this, but it would be fair to say that the expansion and creation of "Territories" which some would say were colonial in nature was similar to what the British called an Empire. Possible sources: http://www.politicalreviewnet.com/polrev/reviews/INTA/R_0020_5850_1117_1004595.asp Beisner, Robert L. Twelve Against Empire: The Anti-Imperialists, 1898-1900. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985. LaFeber, Walter. The New Empire: An Interpretation of American Imperialism, 1860-1898. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1963. Tompkins, E. Berkeley. Anti-Imperialism in the United States: The Great Debate, 1890-1920. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1970. http://www.civics-online.org/library/formatted/texts/anti-imperial.html "Platform of the American Anti-Imperialist League (October 18, 1899)." --User:Reboot 2005, April 14, 9:17pm EST == The map on religion needs to be removed == --I think having a map showing major religious affiliations in the U.S. is a great idea, but the one that's on here now is completely unintelligible. It really contains no useful information at all, and will likely be misunderstood by most of the people who see it. The map portrays places like West Virginia and Colorado as being far less religious than states like Massachusetts or New Jersey. Anyone not too familiar with the U.S. will be greatly misled by this map, and I believe we should have one showing majority populations of individual religions/denominations. Unless anyone can give serious reasons to leave this particular map on here, I think I'll remove it in a few days. --User:Jleon 15:46, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I agree. It's just a bunch of random colors representing alleged claimed percentages of religious belifes, but not what kind or anything useful. The source of the data is highly questionable. It's also under copyright, and while the the fair use declaration is certainly arguable, it is not ideal. User:DreamGuy 21:54, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) == Portal == Someone removed the Wikipedia:Wikiportal/United_States link from the top of the page. I'm curious who's in favor of the portal and who's against it. I think the portal needs a little work (the blue is a bit harsh to my eyes), but it's promising, and could be useful. Who thinks we should add the link back? And who thinks it should stay off? -- User:Dpark 19:08, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) *I am against the portal. There are enough ways to point to other related items, like wikilinks, external links in the text and the whole separate section on links. No need to duplicate this in a newspaper style portal. Additionally this particular portal is a rather haphazard and overly decorated choice of references. It does not fit in wiki style. −User:Woodstone 19:23, 2005 Apr 25 (UTC) *The portal is ok by me, but perhaps a bit redundant. If there's a link to it in the U.S. article it really shouldn't be in the intro. --User:Jleon 19:27, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) *The portal looked rather cluttered and silly where it was put. I am getting rather sick of all the wiki-media/-source/-whatever being crammed into every article (tons of boxes everywhere). If it is put into this article, with the ugly tiny box it is in now, it should be stuffed near the bottom somewhere, not at the top. Ideally, somebody at wikimedia central should cook up some default links for all these offshoots and thingamabobs that are related but not directly relevant to the article so that they show up unobtrusively elsewhere on the page instead of crammed into the article text itself. User:DreamGuy 21:36, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC) So basically, no one really wants it. Those of you who are neutral definitely don't want it at the top. I just asked yesterday, so others might chime in later. If it's decided that no one really wants it, we can just leave it off. If enough people chime in to say they want it, we can put it somewhere further down, I suppose. -- User:Dpark 12:13, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) I readded the portal link before reading this. It would seem that your portal is falling into disuse, maybe the link to it will attract some more collaborators... -User:MarSch 15:00, 6 May 2005 (UTC) * I've moved the portal down to "external links" as a compromise. It doesn't really fit there, but it looks like no one really wants it at the top. If anyone can find a more fitting place, by all means, move it there. -- User:Dpark 20:17, 6 May 2005 (UTC) ** Actually, since it's a link into the Wikipedia namespace, I think it qualifies as an external link, so I guess it does belong there. -- User:Dpark 20:19, 6 May 2005 (UTC) == Official Language == I noticed someone had removed "and a percentage of Spanish" from the "official language" entry of the infobox. I was going to add it back (perhaps worded differently, because it's awkward as is), but decided I should just ask what everyone else thinks. This has been discussed before (check the archives if you want). But it doesn't look like anyone really resolved it. The facts(-ish): *There is no "official" language. *While English enjoys the widest use by far, 10% of the population speak Spanish in the home. *All government documents are in English. (So far as I know.) *All public schools are required to teach English. (I believe.) My question is what do we want to call the "official language", since there really isn't one? Do we go with what's ''widely spoken''? And thus put Spanish back in the box? Or do we go with ''what the government uses''? And thus only list English? The listing of Spanish seems to come and go arbitrarily depending on who stops by the page. It'd be nice to have an reasonable consensus. -- User:Dpark 13:07, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) *The "official language" entry should say "none", since there is no official language. Why is this so hard? --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 13:55, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) : Well, as Languages in the United States notes, in several states English, Hawaiian and Spanish are official (so really the question is does the infobox in the US page refer only to the federal govt, or to state and local govts' definitions of official too?). As [http://www.dailystar.com/dailystar/opinion/70297.php] this article notes, other states have declared English their official language. The only place I know of where English isn't the de-facto official language is [http://www.lasculturas.com/lib/sd/blsd091099a.php El Cenizo, Texas] (and that's an old news story, I don't know if it's still valid). -- 14:00, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::Oh, and now that I think on it, aren't the prevailing tribal languages official on various native-american reservations? -- User:John Fader (User talk:John Fader | Special:Contributions/John Fader) 14:00, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) :Because at the very least, the government conducts business in some written language. It makes sense to me to at least acknowldge that. -- User:Dpark 16:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) CIA World Factbook can be taken as reasonably authoritative on the US government's position as it's a US government publication. No official language is listed for United States, whereas for Philippines we have "two official languages - Filipino (based on Tagalog) and English; eight major dialects - Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilocan, Hiligaynon or Ilonggo, Bicol, Waray, Pampango, and Pangasinense". So I think the "official language" shouldn't be included in the infobox for United States, but the fact that government business is conducted overwhelmingly in English only, while there is a substantial minority Spanish-speaking population, should be noted. --User:Tony Sidaway|User talk:Tony Sidaway 14:14, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) : This is the trouble with infoboxes (as with all kinds of form-filling): it really wants a one-word answer, but reality demands an complex and nuanced paragraph. The United Kindom page (which has exactly the same problem) solves it with a footnote; I think the US should do likewise. -- User:John Fader (User talk:John Fader | Special:Contributions/John Fader) 14:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) :The Factbook didn't actually skip the "Languages" section, though. It says "English, Spanish (spoken by a sizable minority)". It doesn't call them official, but provides the info nonetheless. Maybe we should do the same. How difficult would it be to modify the infobox template so that it doesn't call them official unless they actually are? I still feel we need something there, because the government uses English to conduct business in. :The style used on the UK page is possible, as John Fader pointed out. In any event, the factbook does seem to give support to the idea that if we include English, we should also include Spanish. -- User:Dpark 16:29, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) I agree, the appearance of an Official languages field in the infobox is the cause of the problem. Replace that by Languages and then each of the three-dozen articles currently using Template:Infobox Country can be edited accordingly to reflect the new semantics. But this should be discussed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries, not here, and the proposed change should be publicised adequately. If substantial opposition should occur and it is not possible to resolve differences easily, perhaps we would have to list it on Wikipedia:Current surveys. --User:Tony Sidaway|User talk:Tony Sidaway 17:15, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I'm making a couple of attempts at a footnote; please check it and edit as necessary. --User:Golbez 17:26, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC) == Minor holiday problem == The table about holidays implies that government organizations observe Martin Luther King Jr Day, President's Day, and Colombus Day. Some do, but many, including schools, do not. Are there statistics on the matter that anyone knows about? President's and Colombus Days are, in my experience, extinct holidays. The table makes it seem like they are not. :They aren't extinct as far as the federal government is concerned. We should perhaps mention that these are holidays that the government recognizes, but private citizens and businesses are not required to observe them. It also mentions they are federal holidays. And it does say that not all schools observe them. Do you have a specific complaint? --User:Golbez 03:29, May 5, 2005 (UTC) == Photographs == Any consensus for adding photographs of "typical" (as much as such a thing is possible) vistas and views and sights of the U.S. to this article? It's nice to have the Bill and Rights and George Washington, but those photos are a bit static and I like the idea of adding photos that aren't so "official" - a main street in a town, perhaps, or something along those lines. See New York City's article for an example of what I'd consider dynamic photos that enhance an article. User:Moncrief 05:14, May 10, 2005 (UTC) :I agree; how about a picture of, perhaps, a football game? The NYSE trading floor? --User:Golbez 21:47, May 10, 2005 (UTC) ::Totally. Either of those would work in the appropriate section. User:Moncrief 22:06, May 10, 2005 (UTC) == Culture == The section on Culture seems to be focused on exported popular culture, rather than on American culture as experienced within the country. And, it mentions Seattle several times: I like Seattle a lot, but it has not had much influence on American culture. Whereas, for example, Californian culture (and I'm not writing this as a fan) has had a huge influence and it is not really mentioned. User:brassrat I agree with user:brassrat. The culture section is focused on exported culture in TV and movies. The US is a diverse place and there should be a section titled Regional Culture. Please user:Golbez stop vandalizing and deleting the Regional Culture section. Can we get a sys admin to stop Golbez? Hey, 67.123.172.188, sorry if I called your additions "useless," but Golbez didn't vandalize anything: your additions weren't even really about "culture," you basically just mentioned different church denominations and said that Northerners are called Yankees. I agree with Brassrat too, but your stuff didn't really cover that. --User:Jleon 01:47, 14 May 2005 (UTC) :lol wtf --User:Golbez 04:23, May 14, 2005 (UTC) :That said, the anon's edits may well have a place, since it has been pointed out, accurately so, that the Culture section focuses too much perhaps on the export of culture. Still, it was turning into somewhat of a checklist of the ''different'' cultures in America, without giving any time to the unifying culture most Americans have. The different bits may have a use, but this is the article for the country, not for the states or the regions. --User:Golbez 04:30, May 14, 2005 (UTC) Why not rename "Culture" section, "Entertainment Industry" and move it to the "Economy" section. You can read the "Culture" section and think the USA is all about "Sex and the City". The culture section has nothing about cultural traditions, traditional clothing, traditional attitudes, or traditional holidays. And yes, my input is more like a starting point for others to add on to. I have not lived in the North, so I could not add much about it's culture, but had hoped someone would add on. As far as deletion of newly entered is concerned, it is forbidden in all the guidelines I have read. Stubs are encouraged as a starting point. If somebody goes along deleting contributions, pretty soon people will stop contributing. -anon The United States is a great center of higher education, boasting more than 4,000 universities, colleges and other institutions of higher learning, the top tier of which may be considered to be among the most prestigious and advanced in the world. Neither is mentioned that higher education in the US is one of the most expensive in the world, nor that besides few universities (Berkeley, Princeton, Harvard, Stanford) universities in America have a low level of education compared to universities around the world. This is something commonly known to many people that come from other countries, that shared with me (what I experiences as well) that getting a higher degree in the US is almost as simple as finishing regular school in other countries. User:64.175.251.190 --Well if you have anything other than anecdotal "experiences" to show as evidence, then please share it with us. --User:Jleon 19:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC) The "top tier" of U.S. universities is just that: the Ivies (Harvard, Yale, etc.), the elite schools (Chicago, Johns Hopkins, etc.) and the prestigious public universities (Michigan, Virginia, Texas-Austin, etc.). They are still superior to most European and Asian universities. My "anecdotal experience" as an American in Europe: I found Euro-academics to be rather easy and the grading much more lenient than in the States. I would add that many U.S. flagship universities (Michigan, Texas, Virginia, North Carolina, Minnesota and dozens of others) are more rigorous and require more work than do many European universities.User:Mason.Jones 17:02, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==This article is almost twice the recommended size== This article is 61k that is almost twice the recomended size. See Wikipedia:Article_size. I am not seriously demanding that the article is shortened but I request that people who think that the USA can exceed the size limit allow this for other countries too, for e.g. Germany. Please express your support at talk:Germany. User:Andries 18:32, 20 May 2005 (UTC) --Let's not overreact to the issue of the article size. The recommended size is a totally outdated suggestion based on the fact that some very early browsers could not support articles over 32k. This issue is no longer relevent, and thousands of articles of lesser importance than the United States have gone way over this amount with little notice. --User:Jleon 19:25, 20 May 2005 (UTC) That's not at all what the "article size" article itself says, however: it cites stylistic considerations, as well as (not very compelling) technical ones. Also see Wikipedia:Summary style, which waxes further lyrical on similar issues. Incidentally, on the "thousands of articles" point, this would in fact be about the #324th Special:Longpages, if none of the others had changed size in the meantime. And as Andries says, the real problem is the "precedent setting" one: users who wish to add large amounts of marginal material to a given article will say "but look, it's nowhere near as big as United States, and ''this'' is an Important Topic, too". And there's really no need for it: all the material in over-long sections of this article is ''already'' covered in the various "main articles" on that sub-topic: why have such long sections on Politics of the United States, Demographics of the United States and Holidays of the United States? User:Alai 00:49, 23 May 2005 (UTC) :Because they have pretty much the most basic amount of info. The other logical end is that the article gets so long that several sections end up being only a "see also" link, which is horribly unuseful. This article is pretty much as short as it functionally can be, and some areas can still be expanded. However, only as an outline - detailed info belongs in the proper articles. There's no reason for the 32k limit except for a natural breaking point, and perhaps it should be doubled. I have no problem with setting precedent, this has become a good article. --User:Golbez 06:37, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::As a non-editor of this article, and as a non-USian, I have to say that far from a "basic" amount of info, they contain a horribly extraneous quantity, and in places read as positively waffly. Every other country could also not merely list its national holidays, but put them into a great stonking table -- but how many do? (I dare say lots of us self-indulgent Europeans would have yet ''longer'' such lists.) I strongly urge against "but the US is an important country" arguments, since inevitably they'll end up being replicated elsewhere, and before one knows it, article size standards are totally gone. If you want to argue for that, or for a larger limit, then that's another matter, but let's not simply start with United States (or Germany...) as special cases. User:Alai 13:21, 23 May 2005 (UTC) :::Care to share what you think can be changed, apart from the "great stonking table"? And maybe there needs to be a precedent. --User:Golbez 14:13, May 23, 2005 (UTC) : I don't want to be a nuisance, and yes, this is a good article, but I changed my opinion a bit and I request that this article is shortened to prevent setting a bad precedent. What am I going to say to enthusiastic editors who complain that Wikipedia has double standards with regards to article size? See talk:Germany. User:Andries 06:56, 23 May 2005 (UTC) ::Why are you so scared of Germany breaking the barrier? --User:Golbez 14:13, May 23, 2005 (UTC) :::The trouble there is that Germany has had it history section disportionately lengthened (in search of "balance") by one user, who's specifically cited this article as "precedent" for not shortening it again (among various other assertions in an incredibly long-running edit war over this). You're more than welcome to come over and help sort it out! User:Alai 16:05, 24 May 2005 (UTC) ::::Part of my inspiration in expanding this article was Japan, which has a long and robust history section. However, you'll noticed we've managed a concise history summary for this article, but then again, America is a lot younger than Japan or Germany. I looked at Germany but honestly I don't know enough about it to properly edit it. Looking... okay, I see a major problem already - it spends four paragraphs on a 12 year period. That, and lots of other stuff in History, rightly needs to be split out. It's not my style to get involved in edit wars, though. :/ --User:Golbez 16:27, May 24, 2005 (UTC) I strongly recommend that country, city and other such location-based articles remain under the 30 kb limit. (The warning appears at 30kb). When one reads such articles an overview of the subject is needed, not detail. Articles on countries are made of discrete units (as opposed to a continuous section based article such as history), which can ''very well'' be shortened, and the extraneous details moved to the main articles. ~32 kb also is a sweet spot for readers; it becomes more difficult to read a lengthy article (particularly on screen) if the size is allowed to swell like this. And as far as I've seen, a précis/summary of the topic is usually better written than a longer article which tends to expand on details. Take a look at India, a FA. On an 800x600 resolution on Opera v8, the length of the page is 21 scrolls whereas the US article is 32 scrolls. Comparing the length of both the pages, the India page is ~29.5 kb as opposed to 61kb (double) for the US. (its a vague metric, but it does point out how information is sewn into the India page) One way of reducing the size, is by adding information that is resident in markup such as tables relegated to a template. See also Wikipedia:Wikiproject Countries.  =user:Nichalp (User Talk:Nichalp)= 09:54, May 23, 2005 (UTC) :It is entirely possible to OVERshorten. Shortening should be done for form, not to reach some arbitrary number. No one here has yet stated what they think should be shortened in this article; until you do, your concerns are merely aiming towards a number, rather than a solution. I agree that the 32k barrier is a useful figure for readability; however, an article should not be sacrificed to meet it. :Looking at India now to compare... Politics can be shortened, it's entirely possible I overexpanded it. Demographics! That's where a major part of the bloat is. (And I can say that because it's not my baby), you could lose a few k there, particularly in "race". Same deal for social issues - India doesn't even have a social isssues section. (Maybe it should?) How best to elegantly remove this? Changing these wouldn't drop it to 32k, but it would help shorten it, and not even for shortening's sake either. Lemme see what I can do. --User:Golbez 14:13, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ===The quest for shortening=== Bear in mind I am shortening for readability, not for shortening's sake. I've identified two further places where it is unnecessarily wordy - Race, and Social Issues. The Race section has more information than the main article! And Social Issues seems to be a unique segment, if the PRC's page doesn't have one, then really, it's there only to attack the USA. Race needs to be MOVED to the main article and some kind of short mention left behind, and Social Issues, I don't know, turn it into a two sentence section whose only purpose is to introduce the main articles. I'm putting this here because I'm about to leave for the day, so someone else take up the work. Thanks :) Sorry if I sound harsh above, but most of the comments at first sounded like shortening for shortening's sake, which is a really bad motivator. Shorten for readability and usefulness, which is what I'm doing. --User:Golbez 14:28, May 23, 2005 (UTC) :Try and see what text is really needed here. I would suggest a radical cut down of the text on the page. Get the page to 22kb. After that inclusion can always be there. See Wikipedia:Wikiproject Country for what headings are recommended. A precis of the text would get the bulk of the matter here, while removing the extra details.  =user:Nichalp (User Talk:Nichalp)= 16:29, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::22k? I'm assuming that's a typo for 32k, and no, again, ''shortening is not the motivation here''. Getting to 32k is not my ideal; cleaning up the article is. It just happens to be that many sections need shortening or moving. There is no reason whatsoever to simply chop off the article at the knees purely to get it to 32k. --User:Golbez 17:13, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::By the way, I'll point out that India cheats - they use a template for their infobox, which saves them several kb. :) They also have much better pictures than we do. Again - 32k is not the ideal, readability is. --User:Golbez 17:15, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::: I know the India page cheats. :) But I've already suggested the same above. I believe quite a lot of kb will be saved. Yes it was 22 kb.  =user:Nichalp (User Talk:Nichalp)= 17:27, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::::We USED to do that; I think the current standards are to NOT use a template for a one-time-use in such a fashion. And that is again focusing only on the size, and not on the actual article. By saying 22k, I think what you're saying it, chop it down to the 100% bare bones, and then add in as needed? --User:Golbez 17:41, May 23, 2005 (UTC) :::::1)I'm not sure if there is a "no one use policy". The Main Page has a couple of one use templates. Many countries have infobox templates too. It keeps unnecessary markup away from the page. 2) Exactly, you've got my point. Trust me, I've used this methodology many times. Précis is the way to enrichen the page. (A vague analogy again: a 5 hr movie won't sell as well as a 2.5 hr one, lots of edits are done to reduce the film length). Best of Luck,  =user:Nichalp (User Talk:Nichalp)= 20:12, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::::::Main Page, Current Events, etc. are special pages and not regular encyclopedic pages. There must have been reason the editors of this page abandoned the one-use template, I don't know what it is. --User:Golbez 20:18, May 23, 2005 (UTC) ::::::: Its a good start. Now 56 kb. BTW the infobox takes just 2kb.  =user:Nichalp (User Talk:Nichalp)= 18:00, May 25, 2005 (UTC) From a readability standpoint, 30KB is just the starting point where an article may be getting too long. Reading an article of that size takes about the same amount of time as the average person's attention span, so going past that point has its costs and those costs need to be justified by the need for the article to be comprehensive (expansive topics simply need more space). The likelihood of being too long to efficiently cover its topic steadily increases as an article grows past that point so such articles should be closely examined to see if they still efficiently cover their topics in spite of their size. I personally do not think any topic is so expansive that it needs 60KB of space, but there are many topics that need 40 to even 50KB of space. I think this is one of those topics (the closer to 40KB the better, though). The beauty of a hypertext encyclopedia is that more detailed treatments of sub topics can be covered in separate articles that are just a click away. Print encyclopedias, such as Encyclopedia Britannica, tend to jam everything into monolithic articles due to the fact that cross referencing other articles is such a pain. Others, such as Encarta, only cover topics in a mid level of detail. We should take full advantage of our hypertext environment and be able to cover topics in a mid level and a high level of detail - all in one encyclopedia. That is the aim of Wikipedia:Summary style (oh, and lead sections should also serve as concise articles in their own right - so that is three types of encyclopedias we can be at the same time by using Summary style). --User:Maveric149 14:55, 24 May 2005 (UTC) ==Protection?== Page protected to discourage graffiti. I suggest it remain protected until the fuss over the Koran desecration controversy of 2005 fades away. Till then, I hope critics of the US will add neutral, balanced text explaining the reasons for their anti-American sentiments to whatever article(s) they feel are appropriate. Wikipedia does not endorse OR condemn US policy. (See NPOV policy.) User:Ed Poor user talk:Ed Poor 15:10, May 27, 2005 (UTC) --Most of the vandalism on this page looks like it is either done by teenagers or the mentally ill, not necessarily from people overseas who are upset about recent news stories. I think blocking this page is unlikely to do much good. --User:Jleon 15:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC) :Since the page is locked and I cannot currently make the edit myself, I'll put it down here so that it's not forgotten. Can somebody please make it clear that the President and V-P are elected on the same ticket. As the article reads it could be taken to mean that there are separate elections for the two posts. --User:Rednaxela 19:19, 27 May 2005 (UTC)- One more thing: Where's the 'This page is protected to deal with vandalism. -Please discuss suggested changes on the talk page' tag gone? Agreed -- the protected page tag needs to be there. User:Earpol 20:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) : can someone please add an interwiki link to mt:Stati Uniti ? thanks. User:Srl 09:18, 28 May 2005 (UTC) --I still don't understand the purpose of the blocking- there's ALWAYS been vandalism on this page, and it always gets reverted within 2 or 3 minutes. Whoever put the protection did not bother to discuss this with us first, and if you're waiting for damaging news stories to fade away then the protection is likely to never get lifted. --User:Jleon 18:10, 28 May 2005 (UTC) --I agree completely. Protecting the page was not even done properly -- there is still no "protection tag" on the main article. The page was protected, out of the blue. I believe the current protection on the United States page is in direct violation of Wikipedia protection policy -- read the following direct excerpt and justify the current lockdown: A semi-permanent protection is used for: *Protecting high visibility pages such as the Main Page from vandalism. *Maintaining the integrity of the site's logo. *Maintaining the integrity of key copyright and license pages. *Maintaining the integrity of press releases. *Protecting certain ''"system administration"'' pages. *Protecting the often-used texts in the MediaWiki namespace. *User pages and their subpages that are subject to repeated vandalism. A temporary protection is used for: *Enforcing a "cool down" period to stop an "Wikipedia:Edit war," upon request. *Protecting a page or image that has been a recent target of ''persistent'' vandalism or ''persistent'' edits by a banned user. *Preventing changes to a page while investigating a possible bug in the MediaWiki software. The protection of a page on any particular version is not meant to express support for that version and requests should therefore not be made that the protected version be reverted to a different one. Talk pages and user talk pages are not protected except in extreme circumstances. When a page is particularly high profile, either because it's linked off the main page, or because it's recently receieved a prominent link from offsite, it will often become a target for vandalism. It is best not to protect pages in this case. Instead consider adding them to your watchlist, and reverting vandalism yourself. User:Earpol 20:05, 28 May 2005 (UTC) *I've unprotected. I think there are enough vandal fighters here with United States on their watchlist to keep the various graffiti artists, POV pushers, and silly bastards in check. --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 20:52, 28 May 2005 (UTC) == Top ancestry map == If I may give my two cents... the top ancestry map in the article is very interesting, but it is also very misleading for people not familiar with statistics. The map tend to over-represent minorities. One example: take a county in Virginia in which 30% of people have Black American ancestry, 29% have German ancestry, 28% have English ancestry, and 13% have Irish ancestry. On the map, this county will appear as an African American county, although in reality white people are 70% of the population in this county. Same can be said about the Mexican counties on the map. It would make more sense to provide a map of races, based on Census 2000, with a colour for each county according to which race is the majority in the county (either non-Hispanic White, or Hispanic, or Black, or Asian, etc.). Such a map would better reflect the location of minorities in the country. User:Hardouin 21:24, 27 May 2005 (UTC) == Criticism == Hmm, I wonder where the "Criticism" section is... Maybe such an imporant section as "Federal holidays" took its place? User:helix84 14:22, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) --Why does there need to be one when there aren't any "criticism" sections for other countries? We need to remember that these are encyclopedia articles, not internet blogs. --User:Jleon 15:31, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) : I think there used to be a Criticism section, but it is now the enormous WP article on Anti-Americanism (with an equally huge talk page attached). I concur with Jleon. If people really want to read about criticism of the U.S., that's what the Anti-Americanism article is for. --User:Coolcaesar 22:03, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC) == recent supposed fix of photos == Important cities Main.........HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY article:.....HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY List of......HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY cities in....HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY the..........HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY United.......HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY States.......HSTN......CHCGO.......LA........NY .............HSTN..................LA........NY The..........HSTN..................LA........NY United.......HSTN..................LA........NY States has...HSTN..................LA........NY dozens of....HSTN..................LA........NY major cities, including several important global cities... City names are where the photos (wider than here) are. Now, was it worse before that?--User:JimWae 04:14, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC) == Goverment Type == :Changed from "democratic federal republic" to "constitutional federal republic". The Constitution guarantees to every state a
Republican form of government (Art. 4, Sec. 4).
As for federal, refer to the Pledge of Allegiance:
"...and to the republic for which it stands"
VS
Constitutional Republic:
this states that there are limits imposed on the
federal government, and an integralpart of how we
should define of our country.

Democratic and republic are directly contrasting terms,
and I feel I have well stated my case for the latter.
--User:Cuimalo 02:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ----
*Democracy contrasts with terms like aristocracy, meritocracy, & oligarchy *Republic, especially as understood by Founding Fathers of the United States, contrasts with monarchy - see republicanism * --User:JimWae 05:16, 2005 Jun 10 (UTC)
All the above define who rules and how; how can they be anything but opposed?
I take it you agree?--User:Cuimalo
"A democracy is nothing more than mob rule..." --Thomas Jefferson


* The Pledge of Allegiance also describes the U.S. as "one nation" and "indivisible", claimed characteristics that are hard to reconcile with the concept of a ''federal'' system of government. The federal government offers another definition of itself, in the CIA World Factbook, describing itself as a "Constitution-based federal republic; strong democratic tradition". If the federal government has the power to define itself, it has done so in a contradictory manner. * As for the idea that "democratic" and "republic" are directly contrasting terms, refer to the definitions for [http://www.answers.com/democracy democracy] and [http://www.answers.com/republic republic] on Answers.com. They are two words that have varying means over time and place. Even the Federalist Papers definition of "republicanism" and "democracy" does not describes them as directly contrasting, but as 2 different ''types'' of popular government. * User:Mateo SA | User talk:Mateo SA 05:26, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
Well put. However we are one nation of several states, see federal. As for the types if government, once again, they are as mutually exclusive as a king and a dictator. They cannot exist together. I do agree with "constitutional federal republic" though.
Look into the Anti-Federalist Party; they gave us the bill of rights. They are the other side of the conversation; co-authored by the aforementioned Thomas Jefferson.
Does anybody disagree with "constitutional..."?--User:Cuimalo 10:26, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC) ----
* "All the above define who rules and how; how can they be anything but opposed?" — Because they are terms which define imprecise concepts, concepts that often overlap. There is no government in the world that is a perfect and exclusive democracy, aristocracy, meritocracy, oligarchy, or republic. Many monarchies have had aristocratic or oligarchic aspects (e.g., Saudi Arabia), and today, many have democratic aspects (e.g., the United Kingdom). The ancient Roman Republic—the ancient source of the term "republic"—was strongly influenced by an aristocracy. Whatever the (often inconsistent) definitions given to democracy and republic by the "Founding Fathers", the most common definition of the word democracy today is simply "a government in which ultimate sovereignty lies in the people, and is exercised either directly or indirectly". * Another point about the Constitution. Article 4, Section 4 says "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government . . . " That is, the Constitution ''instructs'' the "United States" (the federal government) to guarantee a "republican form of government" to each state; it does not itself make the guarantee. * User:Mateo SA | User talk:Mateo SA 14:57, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you,
All governments are the submission of the people to the rule of a common force, I feel the definition is void.
These people vested in the constitution, the contract of the sovereign state and the government.
These people are guaranteed, in one way or another, a republic. This is all required of the federal government to retain this contract.
--User:Cuimalo 02:22, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) ----
* All that being said, however, I think the best term to use for the infobox was the term it used originally: "federal republic". I believe that is the most commonly used label for the United States today. There is no way to completely and precisely define the government of the United States in less than a paragraph. "Federal republic" adequately describes the category in which the U.S. belongs. User:Mateo SA | User talk:Mateo SA 15:18, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
: No, the original was "democratic federal_republic", please read the title.
"Federal_republic" neglects the limiting power of the constitution and amendments, along with the source of it's power.
--User:Cuimalo 02:22, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::* Federal republic was the term used on this page from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States&oldid=13249622 Jan 31, 2005] (when the section ''government type'' was 1st added to the infobox) to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States&oldid=9824869 May 4, 2005], when User:John-1107 added the word democratic. ::* The Constitution is not the source of the government's power—the people are, as the Constitution acknowledges in the Preamble. ::* If a republic is something different from a democracy, then there is no need to add the phrase "constitutional"; limited government is part of that concept of a "republic". Constitutional itself doesn't necessarily mean a limited government—the People's Republic of China, for example, has a constitution. ::* The line in the infobox is not intended to describe all aspects of a country's government. It simply provides a short classification of the country in relation to other countries. The term "federal republic" is a simple, fairly accurate label used by many sources. User:Mateo SA | User talk:Mateo SA 23:55, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC) CONTINUED IN "Democracy?" == "The United States traces its national origin" == "The United States traces its national origin to the United Colonies of America". :I really hate these fuzzy statements we get in Wikipedia. :What does "traces" mean? :Next question: if "traces" means "believes that" then what exactly is the entity "United States" that believes it. :Next question: depending on what "traces" and "United States" mean I will ask what "its national origin to the United Colonies of America" means.User:24.64.166.191 07:34, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Instead of this meaningless fluff, why can't we just write what happened: "some politicians held a meeting and agreed to form a federal entity". User:24.64.166.191 22:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Seizing vs. Stealing == There's a revert war starting between User:Gabrielsimon and some other posters. I've personally reverted twice, and I'm unwilling to participate in this further without some sort of discussion. Gabrielsimon has repeatedly changed ''[...] the U.S. displaced most Indian nations, seizing their lands and destroying or forcibly relocating many.'' to ''[...]the U.S. displaced most Indian nations, stealing their lands and destroying or forcibly relocating many.'' (Actually on the last edit, he misspelled it. I'd appreciate it if someone else would fix that. I don't want to be reverting it myself again.) Others (including myself) have repeatedly reverted back to "seizing". This has been briefly discussed on User talk:Gabrielsimon. ''Stealing'' is POV. It implies a moral judgement. As such, it does not belong in the article. Quite frankly, I think the early US government ''did'' steal land from the Native Americans, but opinion is not valid for article inclusion. What's factual is that the land was seized. I think the text should stay that way. Gabrielsimon has already violated the Wikipedia:Three-revert_rule. I refuse to violate it myself. I'd like it if we could resolve this quickly, without extending this revert war, and without needing to resort to administrative involvement. Comments? Gabrielsimon, I welcome comments from you as well. -- User:Dpark 22:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) : I concur with Dpark that although some Americans would agree that "stealing" is an accurate description, the term is too loaded and controversial to be used in an encyclopedia article. "Seizing" is factually accurate and relatively neutral. --User:Coolcaesar 22:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) : I've fixed the spelling, but I did not revert to "seized". I'd still like more input. -- User:Dpark 23:12, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC) :As every land was 'seized', i find it rather redundant.
This land was taken by force from England, where is the Kings credit? :) --User:Cuimalo 01:43, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :The Israel article avoids this problem by not mentioning land seizure.User:24.64.166.191 22:31, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :How about "forcibly seized without due process or compensation"? No moral judgement involved. :It might help to make a distinction between land in the territory sense (conquered and annexed) and the real estate sense (land use rights denied).User:24.64.166.191 00:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Gabrielsimon, you're continuing to revert, even though not a soul has agreed with your opinion-pushing. You even reverted the compromise "taking". You're speaking of historical truth while pushing a moral judgement. Please stop. If you wish, we can further discuss the issue, but your continued POV-pushing is unreasonable. -- User:Dpark 22:23, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) (Same message posted on User talk:Gabrielsimon) :"Seizing" is much less POV than "stealing". Please give up this revert war. Gabrielsimon says "read the talk page" in his edit summary, but he has never taken the time to actually use the talk page himself. User:Rhobite 22:40, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) : I agree with Gabrielsimon, and I don't understand why everyone is so sensitive about using the word "stealing" when that clealy was what occured. "Seizing" could imply that they were justly compensated for their losses, like what we mean when things are "seized" under eminent domain today. What is so POV about using terms that are simply truthful? Personally, I believe trying to whitewash this country's history is unpatrioitic in the extreme. --User:Jleon 23:31, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) :: It's not about whitewashing the country's history. (This has nothing to do with patriotism.) It's about remaining neutral. "Stealing" is immoral, whereas "seizing" carries different connotations. I might say that the United States stole the land, but that's pushing my opinion. I might also say that Nazis are sick, pathetic scum. Again, that's my opinion. Opinion and judgements do not belong in wikipedia articles. We should be presenting a formal style to the world. If you don't like the word seize, because you feel it's ambiguous, I'm sure there's another word, or we could simply add a qualifier. But "stealing" is definitely not the word we should be using. It's too loaded, too judgemental. -- User:Dpark 23:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Gabrielsimon, what would it take to get you to discuss this? You completely removed the discussion from your talk page, and despite repeated reverts, you haven't said a single thing here. I'm not saying that the government didn't steal the land. I'm just saying we need to pick a more neutral term. -- User:Dpark 23:51, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) Also, could someone please fix the page? The latest revert is misspelled and confusing, and I don't want to violate the 3 revert rule. -- User:Dpark 23:53, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) stealing is not POV stealing is exactly what happened, and in the interest of honesty, it is the term that shall be used, so say i. senstiivities be dammned, i say, for it is EXACTLY what happened, saying any other term is an attempt at sugarrcoating there issue. yes Stealing has oimmoral connnotations, and guess what, what they did was immoral, so why not use that word? are you trying to dress it up fancey like? also it was Stealing before you changed it to siezing, User:Gabrielsimon 00:02, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Because, as has been said (N+1) times, your personal moral opinion (even though I agree with it in this case) should not inform the content of the article.. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. "Seizing" and "stealing" are both true (IMHO), but "stealing" implies a disputable moral judgment whereas "seizing" is simple fact, so the latter will be used, says I and everybody else. User:Nickptar 00:06, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) stealing is a simple fact, seizing is trying to get around the point that the thefts occurred, so stealing should remain, honesty and integrety, no? User:Gabrielsimon 00:08, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :So whose land did you steal, Gabe? --User:Golbez 00:09, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) i stole no ones land. my culture is one of those that were displaced in canada, if you want to know more then that, you sould IM me, Gab the shaman on AIM. User:Gabrielsimon 00:13, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : You sound biased by your history. When two governments oppose each other and take land by force it is not generally referred to as stealing. We had a war with a group of lesser military capability. This has happened over and over throughout history. Just b/c it was wrong (the article as you claim it was originally) does not mean it should be maintained in this page. User:JShultz i dont use my cultural history to make judgments here. i simply do not think that sugarcoating the issue is a good thing. it is BECAUSE it was wrong that it should be maintained, lest your attempting to erase the mistake in some fashion as for how people sound, you sounded insutling on the earlier post you made. User:Gabrielsimon 00:16, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Why not use that word? Because it's not neutral. If the United States government had been convicted of stealing the land, then it might be appropriate to say it was stolen (even more appropriate to mention the conviction, though), but that hasn't happened. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral. "Steal" is not neutral. You yourself admit that it has moral connotations. : And no, it didn't say stealing until you added it. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States&diff=14608626&oldid=14607895 Your change to ''theiving''] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States&diff=14712426&oldid=14704585 You change to ''stealing''] : -- User:Dpark 00:19, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) no one will ever chrge anyone withthe theft of lands that were here before , but that doesnt hcange the fats, changing the facts or how you say them makes things less neutral. if you wish to change Steal to sieze your bending the truth, and that is unacceptable, your only trying to change it to soften the truth in my estimation, based on your words. what areyou afraid of america being fallable? deal with it and leave steal in. User:Gabrielsimon 00:21, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :I don't see my earlier post as it appears to have been removed so I will restate: the majority here feel that what you are doing is inflammatory and that you are using an approach of reversion that is against common Wikipedia standards. That is immature so lay off. If I took your TV, that would be a valid use of the term "stealing". If Canada takes your TV they "seize it". That's all I have to say on this.User:JShultz theft is theft, if canada, as a country were to take anything ffrom me by seizure it would be compesated, none of what was taken in this case was compesated in anyway, hence THEFT. im not being inflammatory, you only see it that way if your bias takes over. User:Gabrielsimon 00:24, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : I'm not trying to soften anything. I turned your trail of tears comment into a link so everyone can see it. I support your "forcibly relocated" change. I'm all about telling the truth. It's both true and neutral to say that the US seized the land. It may also be true that the US stole the land, but it's not neutral. I think a well written article can convey the truth without conveying opinion. -- User:Dpark 00:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) its not my opinoon i am pushing for i am pushing for unadulturated raw truth. lies and bending truths in the name of not upsetting a minority of people isnt the intent of an encycplopedia is it?aas i said above, if they had compensated the people they took the land from in some way it woul;d be al right to say hat it was a siezure, but no accomadations for restitutuin or compesation were ever made, hence theft. User:Gabrielsimon 00:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) Because you claim that seize is improper usage, I will quote from the dictionary for the word seize: seize 1 a. To put (one) into possession of something. b. To vest ownership of a feudal property in. c. To grasp suddenly and forcibly; take or grab: seize a sword. d. To lay sudden or forcible hold of. Steal 1a.To take (the property of another) without right or permission. b. To get or effect surreptitiously or artfully: steal a kiss; stole the ball from an opponent. c. To move, carry, or place surreptitiously. From the above it can be regarded that Seize is in fact a MORE appropriate term if referred to 1b. You have no grounds to stand on the semantics of Seize as a term used whereby compensation is required Gabrielsimon . I can’t believe I’ve wasted a half hour on this talk page! User:JShultz governmentally speaking as is what you started with, seizure is taking and compensating for, stealing is not compesnating, therafore stealing is in fact more appropriate, in context, which the definitions you posted arent. User:Gabrielsimon 00:38, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Well then back it up, or is that just the "feeling" you have about it? I've tried to present a thoughtful rebutal using a known authority on the subject (a dictionary). You can have drugs, weapons, articles of clothing or whatever seized by the police and never returned or even auctioned. I believe you are using your own beliefs and bias throughout this debate. -JShultz that is law enforcement, not political. your comairison holds no wieght. User:Gabrielsimon 00:45, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Why do you feel that seizing implies compensation? Neither wiktionary nor Webster's say so. What reference are you using? -- User:Dpark 00:47, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) political and intenrational law. User:Gabrielsimon 00:49, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : I say give it up, this kid is beyond help. "that is law enforcement, not political" You don't think it applies to the millitary as well? The police are the domestic branch of the GOVERNMENT! Your posts and edits are also rife with spelling errors so you don't hold to a very high standard. User:JShultz there are diffeernt definitions for different branches of differen cocieties, also, quit being a jerk, my spelling aint the best, irts not my fault that i was hit by a car when i was younger, and the nerve damamge steadily increases, making it harder and hard er to do anything with fine motor skills, but hey, if your just goiing to use that as a paltry exccuse to insuilt me, i suppose you sdont neecd to know anything about my personal history. User:Gabrielsimon 00:53, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Gabriel, what political and international law reference are you using? You still have not produced any kind of reference. I'm afraid you're making it look as though you're intentionally trolling. If you can produce your reference, please do so. :Or, perhaps there's some alternative to both "seize" and "steal" that we could use as a compromise. : -- User:Dpark 01:03, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) mount allison universities law departments books is wherei get my definiintions. User:Gabrielsimon 01:07, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : regarding spelling; I mention it because one of your reversions to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_States&diff=14608626&oldid=14607895 Your change to ''theiving''] (which is even more inflammatory and further points to your deep seated bias) contains spelling errors. I don't know about your hands but they could at least make sure the eyes proof-read before hitting submit to the main article. User:JShultz i dont use my bias to make edits here, if i did i woud go off on a tangent about the resitdential school system and the perverted black robes. ( yes ill try to make better judgements for self corrected spelling) User:Gabrielsimon 01:07, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Which law books are you using, is what I meant. Specific titles or ISBNs. If our use of the word "seize" is legitimately incorrect, then by all means, I wish to correct it, but I don't yet have evidence of that, beyond what you've said. -- User:Dpark 01:12, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) i do not have ISBN's o give you, becuase the mount allison university is in a different city, along with all thier books, and i do not have the finances to go back there. User:Gabrielsimon 01:16, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Don't expect us to take pity on you because your finances are insufficent to find a reference - no reference means you're making it up, by default. Surely there's something online, if you are actually correct. User:Nickptar 01:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) who is deleting responses in this page and for what reason? :Probably Gabrielsimon, becuase he's been known to do this, and what he deleted (everything not written by him, actually) is critical of him. User:Nickptar 01:22, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) Gabrielsimon, please refrain from deleting others' comments: :''Cite one definition of "seize" that says it necessarily implies compensation. User:Nickptar 00:56, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) '' :''By the way: WP:AN3#User:Gabrielsimon. (If Gabrielsimon is blocked, when it expires can he be blocked for repeating the offending revert even once?) User:Nickptar 00:59, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)'' -- User:Dpark 01:27, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) i wont delete comments if, they are not insulting or rude to me, it is not a palce for such things, this site. sound fair? User:Gabrielsimon 01:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :OK, talking in front of you about the length of your block was probably out of line (though it's still nice to leave a ''(personal attack removed)'' or something of the sort, and not touch the non-attacking part of the comment), but how is it insulting or rude to question your definition of a word? User:Nickptar 01:34, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) the rest of that by voldomort is what i beleive you are questioning, well, he was rather rude and insulting, please read the deleted words to see why i think so. User:Gabrielsimon 01:37, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) How about using the word "taking" as a compromise? User:Monkeyman 01:39, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Lets just let him have his way already. "Seizing" is just as POV as "stealing." Whoever said above that these lands were just the spoils of war between two nations really needs to revisit their American history and look at the widespread deception and, in many cases, pure theft of land that occured. There is absolutely nothing POV about the word "stealing" when land was obviously stolen in many instances. --User:Jleon :: No. Articles should be NPOV. "Stolen" implies judgement. Seizing implies no moral judgemens. Besides, the word "stolen" is never used to refer to governments. Governments seize. Citizens steal. The government doesn't steal your car if they catch you selling drugs, they seize it. That's what governments do. -- User:Dpark 02:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) : We already tried "taking". I was fine with that. He changed "taking" back to "stealing", too. -- User:Dpark 02:05, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) *You want someone who ignores 3RR 3 times over to get their way? *We are frequently told (at least once by GS too, I think) that the American natives did not believe that land could be owned, only used. If this interpretation is true that natives did not believe they owned the land, title to it could not be stolen from them. What did happen was that they were denied use of the land - it was "taken" & they were prevented access to it. *There is the other point that there is some evidence of people in the Americas before those genetically related to the native Americans. If that be the case, then the native Americans/ First Nations could very well have taken the land from others *In a number of cases there was ''some'' compensation - they were given new lands (much further away) to which they were forced to move - not fair, I agree * the word "stealing" is unnecessarily inflamatory *--User:JimWae 02:07, 2005 Jun 15 (UTC) :: Just to throw in my two bits: I agree with Dpark and JimWae's analysis. It's like the difference between killing and murder. Most people agree that killing is always wrong, but when it's in self-defense, we call it justified and don't prosecute it as the crime of murder. However, Gabrielsimon has admitted that he has neurological damage which may prevent him from understanding the subtle technical difference between stealing and seizing, so arguing with him any further is futile. It sounds like he lacks the financial resources to visit a law library, so directing him to specific legal references wouldn't help, either. :: If he keeps vandalizing the page, you guys will probably have to take this issue to ArbCom. I hope some admin is reading this and is prepared to block the page accordingly if necessary! --User:Coolcaesar 22:02, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Democracy? == Democracy is not mentioned once in entire article - even single mention repeatedly removed. --User:JimWae 00:13, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC) : I've added several mentions of democracy to the article, in the intro, history section, politics section, and the infobox. We'll have to see if they stay. I have to question whether those editting out the mentions of democracy are simply ignorant of the meaning of democracy, and assume it refers only to direct democracy and are actually acting in WP:AGF, or if they are intentionally pushing their anti-American POV. : -- User:Dpark 01:15, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- :Please refer to the discussion "Goverment Type".
Also, democracy is spelled with a small "d" when refering to goverment.
Can you name instance of democracy in the u.S.A constitution?
----User:Cuimalo 01:38, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :: Why don't we just continue here, since it doesn't look like the previous discussion resolved the issue? We'll just start fresh. :: * A democracy is a government controlled by the people (literally ''people government'' from the Greek). This can be direct or indirect (through representatives). It is entirely correct to refer to the United States as a democracy. A republic is a government in which the power rests with the people, as opposed to, for example, a monarch (literally ''the public thing'' from the Latin). In modern times, "republic" tends to be more specific to representative governments. However you want to look at it, both "democracy" and "republic" apply to America. :: * Democracy is spelled with a big "D" when it's at the beginning of a sentence. Other than that, I'm not sure exactly where you saw democracy spelled with a big "D". :: * As for finding the word "democracy" in the constitution, we can play that game if you want. Why don't you go find the word "nation" in the [http://wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America constitution]? For that matter, why don't you find the word "federal"? Do we need to remove the words "nation" and "federal" from the article as well? The fact that the constitution doesn't use the word "democracy" doesn't mean that the term doesn't apply, and more than it means that the terms "nation" and "federal" doesn't apply. :: -- User:Dpark 02:11, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- We are not a nation, we are a federation; nation means one, we are many. So yes, we need to remove nation. As for Democracy, my mistake. I ask you for your opinion on the issue at hand. What are we? --User:Cuimalo 03:46, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::: The United States government is a single entity, composed of smaller entities. My body is composed of smaller entities, but the whole still comprises only one entity. My question about the use of "nation" was not an attempt to actually say we should not use the word, but instead an attempt to point out that the United States constitution does not explicity state everything about the United States. The United States is a nation. It is also a democracy. -- User:Dpark 04:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- Can we please end this?
IN A DEMOCRACY majority rules. Solders cannot garrison in our homes, no matter the majority vote.
We would have to pass an amendment and change the makeup of the goverment.
I submit that we, the Americas, are not a democracy.

IN A REPUBLIC there are partially autonomous territorial units belonging to a sovereign federation.
The United States Constitution Article 4, Section 4 guarantees to every state a republican form of government.
(Art. 4, Sec. 4) We have states, states rights and a guaranteed republic.
I submit that we, the Americas, are a republic.

A FEDERATION (federal government) is a union or league of smaller bodies (states).
This is by definition the head of a republic.
I submit this is a redundant statement under republic.

IN THIS CONSTITUTION a contract is formed, a charter is stated.
The contract was ratified by the sovereign states, forming a trust for the people.
This is Contract and an important part of our identity.
Republics can exist without a constitution.

I SUBMIT that we are a "constitutional republic." The true workings of the legal system and the government are sadly out of the reach
to the people with the education the govement supplies. I suggest [http://www.badnarik.org/Multimedia/Constitution/ Badnarik's constitution class], free online format and relativity correct.

Supported by Blacks Law, 6th edition (not quoted)
Please reply in the same form: quote, evidence, point.
--User:Cuimalo 03:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- Please dont modify this page before discussion on the issue completes.
User:JimWae, you started another thread on the same subject, why? --User:Cuimalo 03:57, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)--User:Cuimalo 03:56, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- : My replies seem to have been lost in the reformatting. I'll repost them here. :: IN A DEMOCRACY majority rules. We have this in the United States. Citizens elect officials to make laws/enforce laws/etc. Housing soldiers in homes is entirely irrelevant. The United States is a liberal democracy, which means our constitution limits the government. That's why soldiers cannot be forcibly quartered in homes. It does not mean we are not a democracy. [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Democracy Wiktionary: Democracy] [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=democracy Dictionary.com: Democracy] :: IN A REPUBLIC, sovereignty rests with the people. [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Republic Wiktionary: Republic] [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=republic Dictionary.com Republic] In the United States, citizens elect the government. The United States sovereignty rests with the people, and America is therefore a republic. Being a republic has nothing to do with a union of smaller entities. :: IN A FEDERATION ... no argument with your defition, except that this is not redundant with republic, because it has an entirely different meaning (see REPUBLIC, directly above). :: A CONSTITUTION is simply the structure of a thing. In terms of a government, a constitution lays out its powers and limits. This doesn't necessarily have anything to do with protecting the states. Not all government's constitutions are set up to protect the states (or other smaller governmental units). [http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=constitution Dictionary.com: Constitution] [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Constitution Wiktionary: Constitution]. It's technically correct to call the United States a constitutional government, but that doesn't imply protection of the states. :: IN A LIBERAL DEMOCRACY, a constitution limits the government. [Liberal democracy] This is what you were looking for when you called the United States "constitutional". :: The United States is a democracy. The United States is a republic. The United States is a union (federation). The United States has a constitutional government. The United States is a liberal democracy. The United States is all these things. They are not contradictory. :: I added comments in Talk:United_States#Democracy? as well. -- User:Dpark 02:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) : You've also changed your comments a little bit (which is fine), so I'll re-address a couple of things as well. : "We" are not "the Americas". "The Americas" are not a country. Americas. I just feel it's necessary to clarify that point. : I feel that my definition of democracy above is still quite correct. In addition, I feel it's worth pointing out that if the majority truly wanted to allow forced quartering of troops, it would be possible through an ammendment, as you said. That's majority rule right there. Democracy. :: In an emergency situation, the military, forest fire fighters (e.g.) or police can commandeer any vehicle, building or anything else they need and even draft people on the spot. User:24.64.166.191 04:38, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Again, republics needn't have anything do with federations. The constitution guarantees a republican government to the states. That doesn't mean that a republic need be a union of states. Instead, this is a promise that the union will be comprised of a republican government. A union of states could also be composed of an absolute monarchy, which would be the opposite of a republic. : Yes, republics can exist without a constitution. And your assessment of the United States constitution is basically correct. My earlier comment addressed your statement about constitutions in general, which did not speak specifically to the United States constitution. As to your comment about the "true workings of the legal system", you came off as insulting publicly educated citizens. Maybe that wasn't your intention; I don't know. What I do know it that the full text of the constitution is readily available to those who wish to read it. For the most part, the constitution is quite straight-forward. : I submit that we are a constitutional, federal, confederated, liberal democratic republic. I don't expect that to be written in the article verbatim, but currently, all that information is in the article. I feel it needs to stay. : -- User:Dpark 04:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- If they were, its my fault. Sorry.
--User:Cuimalo 04:12, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Not a problem. It was simple to retrieve them. -- User:Dpark 04:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ---- Thx, I will try one at a time. What did they mean by a form a more perfect union? Why are we the "united States of America?" --User:Cuimalo 05:03, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :A Mrs. Powel of Philadelphia asked Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got, a republic or a monarchy?" With no hesitation whatsoever, Franklin responded, "A republic, if you can keep it." :http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/article04/18.html :[Footnote 323] Thus, Randolph on June 11, supporting Madison's version pending then, said that ''a republican government must be the basis of our national union; and no state in it ought to have it in their power to change its government into a monarchy.'' 1 id., 206. Again, on July 18, when Wilson and Mason indicated their understanding that the object of the proposal was ''merely'' to protect States against violence, Randolph asserted: ''The Resoln. has 2 Objects. 1. to secure Republican government. 2. to suppress domestic commotions. He urged the necessity of both these provisions.'' 2 id., 47. Following speakers alluded to the dangers of monarchy being created peacefully as necessitating the provision. Id., 48. See W. Wiecek, The Guarantee Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Ithaca: 1972), ch. 2. : *Clearly there is strong evidence here that at the time they contrasted "republic" with "monarchy", but I'd agree they thought a constitution pretty essential to a republic - rule by law rather than by individuals - --User:JimWae 05:24, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC) ::I could not imagine two more diffrent things.
::Rule by the people and rule buy the king.
::Demo has a latin root, and I doubt that changed. ::--User:Cuimalo 05:36, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :::The UK is both a democracy & a monarchy, so is Canada, Australia,...Movements to do away with the monarchy in those places are called republican movements :::--User:JimWae 05:40, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC) :I'm not quite clear what you're asking. By "more perfect union", I believe they meant either more perfect than other unions in the world, or more likely, more perfect than the United States had previously been. "We" are the United States of America because the government is still a union (or federation) which binds together (theoretically) independent states. -- User:Dpark 06:20, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) ::: Just to throw in my two bits into this debate: Michael Badnarik is not exactly the most reliable source to consult as to the meaning of the Constitution, since he is not an attorney. In law school, one has to take several courses and read about 150 U.S. Supreme Court cases (and the Federalist Papers, and John Hart Ely's Democracy and Distrust) to develop a deep understanding of both the Constitution's original meaning and its meaning as elaborated upon by the Supreme Court over the years. ::: Also, Cuimalo, I highly recommend that you take basic classes in logic, linguistics, and political science at a community college. It appears to me that you are having difficulty grasping the crucial difference between democracy in its original form (what we now call direct democracy) and democracy in its modern form (which encompasses both direct and representative democracy). For me, I think what helped with learning that concept in political science class was my previous training in object-oriented programming, which taught me a great deal about logic (especially the programming concepts of encapsulation and inheritance). ::: Finally, democracy comes from a Greek root, demos, not Latin. I should know---I studied Latin for four years. --User:Coolcaesar 22:23, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Photos in "Important Cities" == -- I'm trying to prevent a revert war from opening up, by starting a discussion on this matter. While Houston may be the fourth largest city in the U.S., most people would agree that it is not the fourth most important (maybe not even among the top ten in that regard). The three ''largest'' cities are also undisputably the three most important, and the only three with real claims of being "global cities." Therefore, I believe we need to agree on keeping these three, and only these three, among the pictures in that section. Otherwise, you're going to have a never ending dispute with people trying to jam pictures of Boston, Philly, San Fran, Dallas, and Miami onto here. --User:Jleon 18:22, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Plus every time a 4th photo gets added, the text margins get mucked up on wider screens that have room for 4 photos but only very little left for text - resulting in one or two words per line of text. It's much better to have the photos underneath one another - without going into the next section.--User:JimWae 18:48, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC) : Actually, with just the three, it still gets mucked up on large screens. The bottom photo runs over the "section line" for the next section on my monitor (1600x1200). I'm going to see if I can clean that up some. Personally, I don't care whether there are three or four. -- User:Dpark 22:27, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) :: I added a couple of clearing breaks: (''<br style="clear:both;" />'') to resolve the runover. -- User:Dpark 22:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) : Well, I tried a (reverse) L-shape with the pictures, with the fourth hanging to the left of the others at the bottom. It worked great, until I turned my resoluton down to 800x600, at which point it became painfully obvious that there should be only one line of pictures. I now say to only have the three pictures. Leave Houston off. -- User:Dpark 23:00, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) While you reformatted the pictures, which is great by the way, I reformatted the text slightly. I also reworded the language for better flow and also to expand the section just a little bit so that we don't have that problem of runover with the images. --User:Gerald Farinas 23:06, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) --I agree that the section should be expanded slightly, but we need to be more careful with the wording we use. Honolulu is in no way the economic or cultural "center" of the Pacific Rim. I can easily name a dozen cities (Tokyo, Seoul, Sydney, LA, etc.) that are far more important to the region. Also, what was the point of repeatedly listing the top three in the first paragraph as "Chicago, LA, and NY"? I can see no logical purpose in listing these alphabetically. On a brighter note though- I think the new photo of Chicago looks really great. --User:Jleon 13:57, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) :The "economic center" and "cultural center" of the Pacific Rim is how the East-West Center and its dignitary visitors have described Honolulu for decades now, including the current Presidents of South Korea, Philippines, Taiwan and the Prime Ministers of Australia and Japan during their last meetings in Honolulu. Honolulu has been quite known as such by international relations academics and students, like myself in Chicago. :The East-West Center [http://www.eastwestcenter.org/] has become the principal meeting place of nations in the Pacific Rim on issues of economics and culture since President Lyndon Johnson's administration. It was used for peace talks during the Vietnam and is currently being used for peace talks between the Koreas. The U.S. Department of State defers Pacific Rim cases to its offices in Honolulu. Honolulu is frequent host or headquarters of several major intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations such as the Asian Development Bank, the NGO Cooperation Network, Mayors' Asia-Pacific Environmental Summit, Permanent Secretariat of the Mayors' Asia-Pacific Environmental Summit, Pacific Islands Environmental Symposium, China-U.S. Conference of Mayors and Business Leaders, Japan-American Conference of Mayors and Chamber of Commerce Presidents, Asia Pacific Urban Technology Institute, among others. Honolulu is the defacto military center of the Pacific Rim throigh RIMPAC, which has its international headquarters in Honolulu. --User:Gerald Farinas 15:46, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) ::The dude is right. I'm a part time university professor in international relations. Honolulu is considered the economic/cultual/military, et al "center of the Pacific." And if I remember correctly, Mr. Farinas here was an advisor for a former United Nations Ambassador? So he should know. --User:James Easton 16:02, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) :::Is my name that recognizable? --User:Gerald Farinas 16:08, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) ::::Dude, you were in the newspapers in Illinois, Hawaii and who knows where else during the last election. --User:James Easton 16:10, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) Someone alert the Sock Puppet Police!!! What an amazing coincidence that User:Gerald Farinas is from Hawaii and now lives in IL., and User:James Easton claims to have seen his name in newspapers in both HI and IL! Jamie must read a lot of newspapers and memorize a lot of names for that to happen. They also managed to post several messages on here in the space of just 2-4 minutes of one another! WoW, great minds must think alike! --User:204.126.251.118 17:45, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) --Ok “dudes”- I don’t know how anyone can possibly compare Honolulu to the incredible importance (both economically and culturally) of Tokyo in the region. Just compare the economic output, or the number of international banks and trans-national corporations based in these cities. Of course I’m not surprised that many international meetings are held in Honolulu on account of its central location and abundance of hotel rooms, but international relations is far different than international finance and culture. I think so-called “symposiums”, “conferences”, and “summits” hardly qualify as important activities at all, because they could happen anywhere and tend to gravitate to places with nice beaches. --User:Jleon 16:18, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) :OK, this is getting out of hand. There is no reason to have a section called "20 biggest cities", that's not relevant. What matters is the important cities. The world cities ARE the three largest; the rest of the top ten is mostly important. Then we can mention others - Honolulu, Seattle, Denver, Atlanta, Boston, Baltimore, Washington, St. Louis, New Orleans, etc. But let's not make it a digest of cities, either. We need an "important cities" article maybe. But let's keep some perspective here - a list should not be the central part of this section. We HAVE an article that lists cities, let's not duplicate info. --User:Golbez 20:34, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC) :: I concur this is getting out of hand. It was my bright idea to enhance the important cities area by adding pictures of the three biggest cities, and now all of a sudden everyone wants to squeeze their own favorite city in, one way or another. I think the section should be limited to the three biggest cities, and then state that the U.S. has many other cities which are listed in an "Important Cities of the United States" article. --User:Coolcaesar 22:30, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) -I think the section looks pretty good right now, the top 20 list helps provide a lot of perspective about the relative sizes of the cities in the U.S., and if we deleted it we' be hard pressed to write a section long enough to fit the three photos into. Also deleting the list will probably only intensify the lengths that people will go in order to see their own hometown mentioned in here. --User:Jleon 23:46, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC) == List of Important Cities == --The list of cities needs to reverted back to the population within city limits. The name of the section is called "Largest Cities" NOT "Largest Metropolitan Areas." Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas (CMSA's) are not even universally accepted in the US as Metro definitions, because there's also Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas (PMSA's). We can't just decide to redefine the word "city" because we want certain ones (Atlanta, DC, etc.) to be included in there. In the U.S., the word "city" refers only to a municiple entity with its own govermental institutions, and this would set a very bad precedent for articles on these cities. It also creates an enornmous amount of ambiguity, for instance, the Bay Area was listed as "San Francisco" even though SF isn't even the largest city in that metropolitan area. --User:Jleon 19:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Smallpox Blankets == I'm not going to get into a revert war, so we can just discuss it here. As I understand it, there is exactly one documented case when someone attempted to infect Native Americans with smallpox. It was Jeffrey Amherst, in the the 18th century, and he was a British officer, not an American officer. JimWae, as the one who's supporting the addition, can you cite another incident, which actually occurred in the 19th century and involved the United States government? The effectiveness of the attempt is also debateable, and the text makes it seem as if a great many Native Americans were killed as a result of the attempt. Population_history_of_American_indigenous_peoples#Deliberate_infection? Discuss. Everyone else's input is also welcome, of course. -- User:Dpark 21:40, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC) :Even if it did happen, it's so minor an event that it doesn't warrant mentioning in this summary article. "Diseased blankets" will just bring up odd questions. --User:Golbez 21:43, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC) No, you see, we need to mention every remotely offensive or terrible thing that America has ever committed against any nation or people in the US overview page in order to equally represent everyones problem with America. Any positive or uplifting stats should be removed promptly. (Sarcasm) User:JShultz 02:58, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) *Anyone notice the revert war in that section is over?--User:JimWae 03:09, 2005 Jun 18 (UTC) == Golbez Economic Revert 06/15/2005 == I inserted some information into the economic section which was reverted. It follows as: *''The social structure of the United States is somewhat stratified, with a significant class of very wealthy individuals, who hold a disproportionate amount of economic capital. On one widely used measure of inequality, the Gini coefficient, the United States has the highest inequality of any wealthy country. Ideas of social mobility figure prominently in the American dream, which holds that someone born into a poor family can, through hard work, ultimately rise into the upper classes. There have been periods where upward mobility in the United States has been low, for example the Gilded Age of the 1880s and the latter part of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty first. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has faulted this recent emergence on a failing public education system and legacy preferences for children of alumni, often wealthy, at elite universities and colleges, which he considers to constitute a threat to democratic capitalism. [http://economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3518560] [http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-06-13-greenspan-gap_x.htm?csp=34]'' What is wrong with this? The United States does have Gilded Ages from time to time. I am reverting it back. Alan Greenspan even recognizes a new Gilded Age has arrived. User:207.224.198.170 02:32, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) :''What's wrong with this?'' It's eco-political discourse that doesn't belong in a factual article on the United States. For example, everybody agrees that there are 50 states, and that the country was founded in 1776. These are facts. But what you are writing is (1) Greenspan's opinion, and (2) is unrelated to the overall message of the article. Besides, anonymous edits are often suspect :-) User:Earpol 03:34, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) :The fact that it includes ext refs in the middle of the section indicates that this is an in-depth statement and belongs on the main "economy of the US" page. This is a summary article, please treat it as such. We can mention the Gilded age, but the rest is info creep. And I would heavily disagree that upward mobility was low "in the latter part of the 20th century". --User:Golbez 04:08, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC) : I'll also put my vote against including the info. It belongs on the full economy article, if anywhere. It's innappropriate to include one side of the "mobility is down" debate, without including the other, and that'll get too long to include here. Additionally, the text implies that wealth inequality and class immobility are linked, which is not necessarily the case. I think the text is somewhat misleading, and slightly misrepresents what Greenspan was actually saying. -- User:Dpark 04:29, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC) :: Here, Here! And in adition to Golbez above, the latter part of the twentieth and early 21st century are ripe with class transition and upward shifts in mobility. Keep this above information OUT of a factual encyclopedia entry on the US. Economist Christopher Jencks at Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School of Government argued against the view of some (Greenspan) that the "escalator of upward mobility" does not move as quickly today as before. "No, I don't see much evidence that that's the case, they've never moved that fast, but I don't think there's much evidence that they've slowed down." And then I found this quote...Nobel Laureate Gary Becker "I see no evidence that, at least in the past 50 to 60 years, the tendency for people who come from lower income backgrounds to be able to rise up has become any weaker in the United States. There is some controversy over how strong it ever was, but I think it remains fairly constant" User:JShultz 02:50, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) == Columbia == People keep removing the reference to Columbia as a name for the United States; Columbia is a perfectly valid and used name (you know, "Columbia the Gem of the Ocean", "Columbia Broadcasting Corporation", "Columbia Gas", "Columbia Pictures", etc.) which is now somewhat archaic but still used poetically, and should remain. Note that it is NOT the same as Colombia the country, if that's what the editors are thinking. User:Earpol 20:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC) *Was it ever used in any way other than metaphorically? --User:JpgordonUser talk:Jpgordon 00:22, 29 May 2005 (UTC) ===>Columbia as America? I can't seem to find any references to this title. I see these coporations that ''include'' Columbia in their name, but I don't understand how that is to refer to the political entity of the USA. Can someone give me an actual reference? User:Koavf 19:12, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC) I've reverted this once before, and I'm about to revert it again. Someone (anonymous) is removing "and (poetically) Columbia" from the list of names of the United States in the intro. A quick look in a dictionary will reveal that the term can in fact refer to America. A quick thought about the name of the United States' capitol will do the same. So, is there some reason not to include it, or is this just someone being wierd and thinking the nation of Columbia has a monopoly on the name? -- User:Dpark 00:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) :It's probably just because it's never used anymore except in DC, but few people give much thought to that. So yeah, it should stay and hopefully whoever's changing it will get the hint. User:Ddye 03:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) :I'm the user who originally added Columbia to the list of alternate United States names, and I have had to put it back more times than I can count. Most of the time, but not always, it's an anonymous edit that removes it, but without otherwise changing anything. I really, really, don't understand why it's a target! It is a perfectly valid alternate name, like ''America''. Probably somebody who doen't know what they are talking about, confusing it with the country Colombia. User:Earpol 10:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

United States




{| align="center" class="toccolours" |- ! width="100%" bgcolor="#ccccff" style="padding:0 0 0 50px;" | Political divisions of the United States of the United States | width="90" | |- | colspan="2" | {| style="background:none;" | align="right" style="font-size: 90%; vertical-align: top;" | U.S. state | align="left" style="font-size: 90%;" | Alabama | Alaska | Arizona | Arkansas | California | Colorado | Connecticut | Delaware | Florida | Georgia (U.S. state) | Hawaii | Idaho | Illinois | Indiana | Iowa | Kansas | Kentucky | Louisiana | Maine | Maryland | Massachusetts | Michigan | Minnesota | Mississippi | Missouri | Montana | Nebraska | Nevada | New Hampshire | New Jersey | New Mexico | New York | North Carolina | North Dakota | Ohio | Oklahoma | Oregon | Pennsylvania | Rhode Island | South Carolina | South Dakota | Tennessee | Texas | Utah | Vermont | Virginia | Washington | West Virginia | Wisconsin | Wyoming |- | align="right" style="font-size: 90%; vertical-align: top;" | Federal District | align="left" style="font-size: 90%;" | Washington, DC |- | align="right" style="font-size: 90%; vertical-align: top;" | Insular area | align="left" style="font-size: 90%;" | American Samoa | Baker Island | Guam | Howland Island | Jarvis Island | Johnston Atoll | Kingman Reef | Midway Atoll | Navassa Island | Northern Mariana Islands | Palmyra Atoll | Puerto Rico | U.S. Virgin Islands | Wake Island |} |}

United States



I have only placed this msg at Alabama, so others can see how it looks before I do anything else. User:TUF-KAT 20:02, Feb 19, 2004 (UTC) :Can you put a header on the territories and districts? Is there an article for them that can be referenced? - User:Texture 20:03, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC) ::There does not appear to be an article on non-states (Political divisions of the United States has a section) -- maybe there should be, but I dunno what could be there besides a list... The political situation in Puerto Rico, Guam and DC is very different from each other and the uninhabited islands. User:TUF-KAT 20:09, Feb 19, 2004 (UTC) It seemed pretty clear to me that the territories were not part of the same grouping as the states, Jiang. Do you have any other ideas besides removing all the non-states? User:TUF-KAT 07:08, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC) :They were not in the same grouping, but did not have a separate heading, so it looked like they were still under the states heading. We could link it to Political divisions of the United States#Dependent_areas_of_the_United_States, but linking to a section within a article may be a bad idea. Create a separate article? --User:JiangUser talk:Jiang 07:11, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC) ::or maybe not have the heading link at all. --User:JiangUser talk:Jiang :::The only reason I know of not to link to a section heading is because the section title could change, thus breaking the link (which still drops you off at the top of the linked article, so at worst it would duplicate what we do now)... This argument is not convincing to me, especially given that I'm certain a special page could be created to show which section links are broken, and the problem would be manageable... Anyway, not linking to anything is perhaps just as good. Are they all "territories" though? DC is a "federal district" I think and I'm not sure exactly what the others relations are...User:TUF-KAT I don't think Puerto Rico counts as a territory either. I'm not sure of the exact legal distinctions though. --User:JiangUser talk:Jiang :I believe Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, etc., are possessions of the United States. FWIW, i don't think they should be lumped with states. Among other things, the box is already big. User:Jengod 08:04, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC) ::I've re-added them with the un-linked header "inhabited territories" and removed the uninhabited islands. I haven't removed the msg link from those uninhabited territories so they won't have to be re-added if we don't like it without them. User:TUF-KAT 08:15, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC) ::The relationship is slightly different - Wake island is a "unincorporated territory of the US" and Puerto Rico is a "Commonwealth associated with the US". PR is in free association with the US (it can leave if it wanted to) so it's not quite a territory.--User:JiangUser talk:Jiang :::Perhaps "districts"? "Administrative areas"? "Non-state districts"? User:TUF-KAT I find "Other inhabited administrative areas" reasonable. User:TUF-KAT 08:11, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC) Sorry for the "Properties of the United States" description. I meant to type "Possessions" and must have mislead my fingers while I was thinking about the Property Clause. At any rate, apparently even "Possessions" has fallen out of use and may not apply to D.C. anyway. "Other inhabited administrative areas" is reasonable and good, but doesn't convey the preciseness and conciseness that wikipedia should present. Consider the defintions and usage found at: *http://www.doi.gov/oia/Islandpages/political_types.htm *http://www.ncfca.org/Pages/OIA%20doc.pdf Note that there is "territory" and "Territory". "Insular Area" is more broad and would help avoid debate from those who would assert that Puerto Rico is neither a territory nor a possession but a commonwealth although under law it is all three. How about: "Insular areas and federal district of the United States". User:BoNoMoJo 21:05, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC) ---- I'm not sure I agree with the addition of Navassa, because it is uninhabited. User:TUF-KAT 23:42, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC) Ah, I see now. I disagree with the removal of uninhabited territories, but it's your page. - User:Calmypal 20:18, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC) :Like all of Wikipedia, it is no more my page than yours. I don't think they should be included because they are of interest to very few people and the box is already large. User:TUF-KAT 21:06, Mar 19, 2004 (UTC) ---- I like most of Cantus latest changes, but lets not multiply terminology (i.e. "Main Outlying Areas") beyond necessity...lets stick with "Insular Area". User:BoNoMoJo 15:37, Apr 9, 2004 (UTC) Cantus has added some more creative and useful formatting, but we should avoid plural--Federal DistrictS--since there is only one in the U.S., and no need to state "Main" Insular Areas since the list is exhaustive...it lists ALL the Insular Areas. User:BoNoMoJo 05:36, Apr 10, 2004 (UTC) :What about Guantanamo Bay? --Cantus (really) Re format: I just feel if we're going to be so inclusive as to have Atoll This and That, that we ought to give all the divisions equal size fonts, in the interest of fairness. :) I'm not in love with it, but I think the prinicple is worthwhile. User:Jengod 00:14, Apr 14, 2004 (UTC) ==Reasons for reverting Cantus' changes== #''Federal district: District of Columbia (Washington, [District of Columbia])'' is (a.) redundant, (b.) we're refering to the district not the city, they are separate entities oddly (see Georgetown, District of Columbia for more insight) #The flag is now oddly in the center of the header on my browsers, which is out of sync with several other templates; (a little fugly) #The edit button leads to mischief because the "set" is permanent--there are 50 states, 1 federal district and X number of insular areas. (also, a little fugly) User:Jengod 19:20, Jul 19, 2004 (UTC) :# Fine. ''sigh'' :# Looks fine in Safari. I still prefer my version, so I'll revert that and try to make it work in other browsers. :# The object of Wikipedia is that everyone can edit everything. It is not immediatly obvious how to edit a Template for new people. It is also a headache for savvy people because you have to construct the URL to go to the Template page and then edit it... way too many steps. And lastly, there is no reason to believe that these Templates should remain static once they're created, as evidenced by us now editing them. :--User:Cantus 10:32, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) :: In my opinion, the content of the template should be restricted to the *content* of the templates alone, and shouldn't confuse itself with the mechanism for changing that content. The content of the articles doesn't contain edit buttons -- Wikipedia provides them. Likewise the content of the templates shouldn't contain edit buttons, that's something that Wikipedia itself should perhaps provide in some manner (e.g. by listing the templates used in a page after each article -- perhaps) :: Adding self-edit buttons *to* the content is messy and goes against a philosophy of separation between content and mechanism, the way I see it. :: Are you going to change all the footers listed here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countries/Footers ? Are you even going to change *all* the templates, including the ones for stub, and such matters? ::User:Aris Katsaris 17:23, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) :::I've already done massive formatting on ALL footers before, so adding an Edit link to all of them sounds like a good idea. Thanks! (P.S.: I've expressed my reasons for adding an Edit button before, so I won't repeat them again. I will only add though that the code {ed|template|text} was specifically added so you could have an Edit link added to Templates. The Edit link was not just added to all Templates, because Templates vary greatly in format and style, so an obligatory Edit link would probably look bad in a lot of templates, that's why the optional Edit link code was created.) --User:Cantus 19:19, 20 Jul 2004 (UTC) I moved the Edit button from the top/left to bottom/right... Personally I think it looks worse now. I prefer the button on its former location (top/left), but "JenGod" doesn't like it there for "aesthetic" reasons. He(?) probably won't like it where it's now either. He just doesn't like the button at all. I'm sorry but this button isn't going away. To quote my dear "friend" User:172, "If I have to fight the mother of all edit wars..." --User:Cantus 21:46, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC) ::Your rigidity should serve you well in the fractured, self-interested and parochial world of the future! We who are about to (continue to) be annoyed, salute you! User:Jengod 22:11, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC) ::: In Wikipedia:General_complaints I've added a comment requesting a solution for this. The way I see it both of you are right -- edit buttons are annoying and ugly. But at the same time editing *without* edit buttons is also annoying and ugly and tiresome. ::: If you agree with what I say Wikipedia:General_complaints, then offer your support and/or comments at that page -- or if you know any other page where such a request would be better made, make the request at that place also. User:Aris Katsaris 22:54, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC) ==Interlang link== *:ja:Template:アメリカ合衆国の州 Ja Wikipedia

United States



#redirect Template:United States

United States



North American countries ka:კატეგორია:აშშ vi:Category:Hoa Kỳ

United States



True or false: an article is allowed to be in more than one category. User:66.245.97.81 23:42, 30 May 2004 (UTC) :True. --User:Aponar Kestrel User_talk:Aponar Kestrel 16:43, 2004 Sep 10 (UTC) == court cases ==

United States



#REDIRECT Template talk:United States

United states



#REDIRECT United States


See other meanings of words starting from letter:

U

UA | UB | UC | UD | UE | UF | UG | UH | UI | UJ | UK | UL | UM | UN | UO | UP | UR | US | UT | UW | UX | UY | UZ |

Words begining with United_States:

UNited_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_States
United_states
United_States-Canada_border
United_States-Canada_border
United_States-Canadian_Border
United_States-Canadian_border
United_States-Mexican_Border
United_States-North_Korea_relations
United_States-related_stubs
United_States/Archive_1
United_States/Archive_2
United_States/Archive_3
United_States/Archive_4
United_States/Archive_5
United_States/Archive_6
United_States/Archive_7
United_States/Communications
United_States/Communist_Party
United_States/Congress
United_States/Democratic_Party
United_States/Department_of_Defense
United_States/Economy
United_States/Foreign_relations
United_States/Geography
United_States/Government
United_States/History
United_States/History_Discussion
United_States/Introduction
United_States/Military
United_States/People
United_States/Political_parties
United_States/President
United_States/Presidents
United_States/Republican_Party
United_States/Standard_Of_Living
United_States/Standard_of_living
United_States/States
United_States/Supreme_Court
United_States/to_do
United_States/Transnational_Issues
United_States/Transportation
United_Statesian
United_States_(disambiguation)
United_States_(mirror)
United_States_(ocean_liner)
United_States_-_Democrat_Party
United_States_-_Democrat_Party
United_States_101st_Airborne_Division
United_States_2000_Census
United_States_2000_Census
United_States_2000_census
United_States_2000_census
United_States_20th_Air_Force
United_States_25th_Infantry_Division
United_States_27th_Infantry_Division
United_States_50th_Space_Wing
United_States_90th_Space_Wing
United_States_Academic_Decathlon
United_States_academic_grade
United_States_administrative_case_law
United_States_administrative_law
United_States_Adult_Soccer_Association
United_States_affiliate_political_parties
United_States_Agency_for_International_Development
United_States_Agency_for_International_Development
United_States_airbases
United_States_aircraft_production_during_World_War_II
United_States_aircraft_production_during_WW2
United_States_Airforce
United_States_Air_Force
United_States_Air_Force
United_States_Air_Force
United_states_air_force
United_States_Air_Forces_Europe
United_States_Air_Forces_in_Europe
United_States_Air_Force_Academy
United_States_Air_Force_Academy
United_States_Air_Force_bases
United_States_Air_Force_facilities
United_States_Air_Force_logistics_facilities
United_States_Air_Force_Museum
United_States_Air_Force_Reserve
United_States_Air_Force_Security_Service
United_States_Air_Force_Special_Operations_Command
United_States_Air_Force_Test_Pilot_School
United_States_Air_National_Guard
United_States_Ambassador
United_States_ambassador
United_States_ambassadors
United_States_Ambassadors_to_the_United_Nations
United_States_Ambassadors_to_the_United_Nations
United_States_Ambassador_to_Russia
United_States_Ambassador_to_Russia
United_States_ambassador_to_Russia
United_States_Ambassador_to_the_Soviet_Union
United_States_ambassador_to_the_Soviet_Union
United_States_Ambassador_to_the_United_Kingdom
United_States_Ambassador_to_the_United_Nations
United_States_Ambassador_to_the_USSR
United_States_ambassador_to_the_USSR
United_States_American_Independent_Party
United_States_American_Party
United_States_and_British_Commonwealth_in_Prophecy
United_States_and_Native_American_treaties
United_States_and_nuclear_weapons
United_States_and_the_United_Nations
United_States_and_the_United_Nations
United_States_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
United_States_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
United_States_Antarctic_Expedition_Medal
United_States_Antarctic_Program
United_States_Anti-Doping_Agency
United_States_Anti-Masonic_Party
United_States_Antimasonic_Party
United_States_Anti_Masonic_Party
United_States_Approved_Name
United_States_Armed_Forces
United_States_Armed_Forces
United_States_armed_forces
United_States_armed_forces
United_States_armed_forces
United_States_armed_forces
United_States_armed_forces
United_States_Armed_Forces_Signal_Corps_Unit
United_States_Armed_Services
United_States_Army
United_States_Army
United_States_Army
United_States_army
United_States_Army_25th_Infantry_Division
United_States_Army_airfields
United_States_Army_Air_Corp
United_States_Army_Air_Corps
United_States_Army_Air_Force
United_States_Army_Air_Force
United_States_Army_Air_Service
United_States_Army_bases
United_States_Army_Civil_Affairs_and_Psychological_Operations_Command
United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers
United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers
United_States_Army_facilities
United_States_Army_industrial_facilities
United_States_Army_locomotives
United_States_Army_logistics_facilities
United_States_Army_Medical_Command
United_States_Army_medical_facilities
United_States_Army_National_Guard
United_States_Army_officer_ranks
United_States_army_ration
United_States_army_rations
United_States_Army_research_facilities
United_States_Army_Reserve
United_States_Army_Reserve
United_States_Army_Reserves
United_States_Army_Special_Forces
United_States_Army_Special_Forces
United_States_Army_Special_Operations_Command
United_States_Army_Squad_Designated_Marksman_Rifle
United_States_Army_Squad_Designated_Marksman_Rifle
United_States_Army_Training_and_Doctrine_Command
United_States_Army_training_facilities
United_States_Army_Transportation_Corps
United_States_Army_War_College
United_States_Army_X_Corps
United_States_Assistant_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Assistant_secretary_of_defense
United_States_astronauts
United_States_Atlantic_Fleet
United_States_Atomic_Energy_Commission
United_States_Atomic_Energy_Commission
United_States_Attorney
United_States_attorney
United_States_Attorney's_Office_for_the_Northern_District_of_Georgia
United_States_Attorney-General
United_States_Attorney_for_the_Central_District_of_California
United_States_Attorney_for_the_District_of_Hawaii
United_States_Attorney_for_the_District_of_Michigan
United_States_Attorney_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Pennsylvania
United_States_Attorney_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Virginia
United_States_Attorney_for_the_Southern_District_of_California
United_States_Attorney_for_the_Western_District_of_Virginia
United_States_Attorney_General
United_States_Attorney_General
United_States_at_the_1972_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_1976_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_1984_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_1988_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_1992_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_1996_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_2000_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_2004_Olympics
United_States_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics
United_States_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics
United_States_Automobile_Club
United_States_Aviator_Badge
United_States_awards_and_decorations
United_States_A_class_submarine
United_States_Bank
United_States_Banking
United_States_Bankruptcy_Court
United_States_bankruptcy_court
United_States_bankruptcy_courts
United_States_bankruptcy_law
United_States_bank_holiday
United_States_Baseball_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_Basketball_League
United_States_Basketball_League
United_States_battles
United_States_battleships
United_States_battleships
United_States_Bicentennial
United_States_Bicentennial
United_States_Bicentennial_Coinage
United_States_bicentennial_coinage
United_States_Bicycling_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_Bicycling_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_Bicycling_Hall_of_Fame/Temp
United_States_Bill_of_Rights
United_States_Bill_of_Rights
United_states_bill_of_rights
United_States_Board_on_Geographic_Names
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart
United_States_bomber_scale-chart
United_States_bomber_scale-chart
United_States_Bomber_Scale-Chart_1
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart_1
United_States_bomber_scale-chart_1
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart_2
United_States_bomber_scale-chart_2
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart_3
United_States_bomber_scale-chart_3
United_States_Bomber_Scale-chart_4
United_States_bomber_scale-chart_4
United_States_book_publishers
United_States_Border_Patrol
United_States_Botanical_Gardens
United_States_Botanic_Garden
United_States_brewing_industry
United_States_brewing_industry
United_States_broadcasting_stubs
United_States_Budget
United_States_Budget_Defecit
United_States_Budget_Deficit
United_States_budget_process
United_States_buildings
United_States_Bureau_of_Land_Management
United_States_Bureau_of_Mines
United_States_Bureau_of_Reclamation
United_States_Bureau_of_the_Census
United_States_B_class_submarine
United_States_Cabinet
United_States_Cabinet
United_States_cabinet
United_states_cabinet
United_States_Capital
United_States_capital
United_States_Capital_Police
United_States_Capitol
United_States_Capitol
United_States_capitol
United_States_Capitol_Police
United_States_case_law
United_States_casualties_of_war
United_States_casualties_of_war
United_States_Cavalry
United_States_Census
United_States_census
United_States_Census_Bureau
United_States_Census_Bureau
United_States_cent
United_states_cent
United_States_Centennial
United_States_Central_Command
United_States_Central_Intelligence_Agency
United_States_Chamber_of_Commerce
United_States_Chess_Federation
United_States_Chief_Justice
United_States_Circuit_Court
United_States_Cities_by_Crime_Rate
United_States_cities_with_a_majority_black_population
United_States_citizenship
United_States_citizenship
United_States_citizenship_test
United_States_Citizens_Party
United_States_Citizens_Party_(1980)
United_States_civil_procedure_doctrines
United_States_Civil_Service_Commission
United_States_Civil_War
United_States_Civil_War
United_States_civil_war
United_States_Civil_War/Previous
United_States_Civil_War/Previous_version
United_States_Claims_Court
United_States_Coast_Guard
United_States_Coast_Guard
United_States_Coast_Guard
United_States_Coast_Guard/Ancient_Order_of_the_Pterodactyls
United_States_Coast_Guard_Academy
United_States_Coast_Guard_Auxiliary
United_States_Coast_Guard_bases
United_States_Coast_Guard_Reserve
United_States_Coast_Guard_ships
United_States_Coast_Survey
United_States_coast_survey
United_States_Code
United_States_Code
United_States_Code_of_Federal_Regulations
United_States_Coin
United_States_Coin
United_States_Coin/Cent
United_States_Coin/Quarter
United_States_coinage
United_States_coinage
United_States_coins
United_States_coins
United_States_college_admissions
United_States_Colonial_History
United_States_Colonial_History
United_States_Colonial_Marines
United_States_Colonial_Marines
United_States_Colored_Troops
United_States_Commemorative_Coin
United_States_Commemorative_Coins
United_States_Commerce_Court
United_States_Commerce_Department
United_States_communications_regulation
United_States_Communist_Party
United_States_Comptroller_General
United_States_Computer_Emergency_Readiness_Team
United_States_Computer_Emergency_Readiness_Team
United_States_Confederacy
United_States_Conference_of_Catholic_Bishops
United_States_Conference_of_Catholic_Bishops'_Office_For_Film_And_Broadcasting
United_States_Conference_of_Catholic_Bishops'_Office_for_Film_and_Broadcasting
United_States_Congress
United_States_Congress
United_states_congress
United_States_Congress/Alabama
United_States_Congress/Alaska
United_States_Congress/American_Samoa
United_States_Congress/Arizona
United_States_Congress/Committees
United_States_Congress/District_of_Columbia
United_States_Congress/Guam
United_States_Congress/Hawaii
United_States_Congress/Mississippi
United_States_Congress/Ohio
United_States_Congress/Oregon
United_States_Congress/Puerto_Rico
United_States_Congress/Senate
United_States_Congress/U.S._Virgin_Islands
United_States_Congress/Virgin_Islands
United_States_Congress:Talk
United_States_Congressional_Apportionment
United_States_Congressional_Apportionment
United_States_Congressional_apportionment
United_States_Congressional_apportionment
United_States_Congressional_Cemetery
United_States_Congressional_investigation_of_the_Unification_Church
United_States_Congressional_investigation_of_the_Unification_Church
United_States_Congressional_Report_on_the_Unification_Church
United_States_Congressional_Report_on_the_Unification_Church
United_States_Congressman
United_States_Congressmen_by_state
United_States_Congress_by_session
United_States_Congress_by_session
United_States_Conservative_Party
United_states_consitution
United_States_Constabulary
United_States_Constitution
United_States_Constitution
United_States_constitution
United_states_constitution
United_States_Constitution,_13th_Amendment
United_States_Constitution,_Amendment_3
United_States_Constitution,_Article_3
United_States_Constitution,_Article_III
United_States_Constitution,_Article_Three
United_States_Constitution,_Fourth_Amendment
United_States_Constitution,_Thirteenth_Amendment
United_States_Constitution/AmendmentTwoTalk
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Eight
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Eighteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Eleven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Eleven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Fifteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Five
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Four
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Fourteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Fourteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Nine
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Nineteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Nineteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_One
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_One
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Seven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Seventeen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Six
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Six
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Sixteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Sixteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Ten
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Thirteen
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Three
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twelve
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-five
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-four
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-one
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-seven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-seven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-six
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-six
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-three
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twenty-two
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentyfive
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentyfour
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentyone
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentyseven
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentysix
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentythree
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Twentytwo
United_states_constitution/amendment_twentytwo
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Two
United_States_Constitution/Amendment_Two
United_States_Constitution/Articles_on_individual_amendments
United_States_Constitution/Article_Five
United_States_Constitution/Article_Four
United_States_Constitution/Article_One
United_States_Constitution/Article_Seven
United_States_Constitution/Article_Six
United_States_Constitution/Article_Three
United_States_Constitution/Article_Three
United_States_Constitution/Article_Two
United_States_Constitution/Bill_of_Rights_Joke?
United_States_Constitution/Commerce_Clause
United_States_Constitution/Elastic_Clause
United_States_Constitution/Failed_amendments
United_States_Constitution/Miscellaneous
United_States_Constitution/Original_texts_on_Wikipedia
United_States_Constitution/Preamble
United_States_Constitution/Problem_with_editing_12th_Amend._§
United_States_Constitution/Unratified_Amendment_Twelve
United_States_Constitution:Part_2
United_States_Constitutional_Convention
United_States_Constitutional_Convention
United_States_Constitutional_Law
United_States_constitutional_law
United_States_Constitutional_Party
United_States_Constitutional_Union
United_States_Constitutional_Union_Party
United_States_Constitutional_Union_Party
United_States_Constitution_Party
United_States_Constitution_Party
United_States_Continental_Congress
United_States_Copyright_Act
United_States_Copyright_Act_of_1976
United_States_Copyright_Act_of_1976
United_States_Copyright_Law
United_States_copyright_law
United_States_copyright_law
United_States_Copyright_Office
United_States_counties
United_States_county_law_enforcement_agencies
United_States_county_police_departments
United_States_court
United_States_Courts_of_Appeals
United_States_courts_of_appeals
United_States_Court_of_Appeal
United_States_court_of_appeal
United_States_Court_of_Appeals
United_States_court_of_appeals
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Armed_Forces
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_D.C._Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_District_of_Columbia_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_District_of_Columbia_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Eighth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Eleventh_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Federal_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fifth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fifth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_First_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_First_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Fourth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Second_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Second_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Seventh_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Sixth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Tenth_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Third_Circuit
United_States_Court_of_Federal_Claims
United_States_Court_of_International_Trade
United_States_Court_of_International_Trade
United_States_Court_of_Military_Appeals
United_States_Court_Tennis_Association
United_States_Court_Tennis_Preservation_Foundation
United_States_cricket_team
United_States_cryptographers
United_States_cuisine
United_States_culture
United_States_currency
United_States_current_events
United_States_current_events
United_States_Customary_System
United_States_Customs_Service
United_States_Cycling_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_C_class_submarine
United_States_Declaration_of_Indepedence
United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
United_States_Defense_Department
United_States_defense_policymaking
United_States_defense_policymaking
United_States_Defense_Policy_Board
United_States_Democratic-Republican
United_States_Democratic-Republican_Party
United_States_Democratic-Republican_Party
United_States_Democratic-Republican_party
United_States_Democratic_Party
United_States_Democratic_Party
United_States_Democratic_party
United_States_Democrats
United_States_Democrat_Party
United_States_Department_of_Agriculture
United_States_Department_of_Agriculture
United_States_Department_of_Agriculture
United_States_Department_of_Agriculture_Foreign_Agricultural_Service
United_States_Department_of_Commerce
United_States_Department_of_Commerce
United_States_Department_of_Commerce_and_Labor
United_States_Department_of_Defence
United_States_Department_of_Defense
United_States_Department_of_Defense
United_States_Department_of_Defense
United_States_Department_of_Defense_Aerospace_Vehicle_Designations
United_States_Department_of_Defense_Aerospace_Vehicle_Designations
United_States_Department_of_Defense_agencies
United_States_Department_of_Defense_facilities
United_States_Department_of_Defense_people
United_States_Department_of_Education
United_States_Department_of_Education
United_States_Department_of_Education
United_States_Department_of_Energy
United_States_Department_of_Energy
United_States_Department_of_Energy
United_States_Department_of_Energy_National_Laboratories
United_States_Department_of_Energy_National_Laboratories
United_States_Department_of_Energy_National_Laboratory_System
United_States_Department_of_Energy_National_Labs
United_States_Department_of_Health,_Education,_and_Welfare
United_States_Department_of_Health,_Education_and_Welfare
United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Human_Service
United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Human_Services
United_States_Department_of_Health_and_Human_Services
United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security
United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security
United_States_Department_of_Homeland_Security
United_States_Department_of_Housing_and_Urban_Development
United_States_Department_of_Housing_and_Urban_Development
United_States_Department_of_Housing_and_Urban_Development
United_States_Department_of_Interior
United_States_Department_of_Justice
United_States_Department_of_Justice
United_States_Department_of_Labor
United_States_Department_of_Labor
United_States_Department_of_Labor
United_States_Department_of_Peace
United_States_Department_of_Peace
United_States_Department_of_Revenue
United_States_Department_of_State
United_States_Department_of_State
United_States_Department_of_State
United_States_Department_of_the_Air_Force
United_States_Department_of_the_Army
United_States_Department_of_the_Defense
United_States_Department_of_the_Interior
United_States_Department_of_the_Interior
United_States_Department_of_the_Navy
United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury
United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury
United_States_Department_of_the_Treasury
United_States_Department_of_Transportation
United_States_Department_of_Transportation
United_States_Department_of_Treasury
United_States_Department_of_Veteran's_Affairs
United_States_Department_of_Veterans'_Affairs
United_States_Department_of_Veterans_Affairs
United_States_Department_of_Veterans_Affairs
United_States_Department_of_Veterans_Affairs
United_States_Department_of_War
United_States_Deputy_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Deputy_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Deputy_Secretary_of_State
United_States_Deputy_Undersecretary_of_Defense
United_States_Deputy_Under_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Dime
United_States_dime
United_States_Diplomatic_History
United_States_diplomatic_history
United_States_Director_of_National_Intelligence
United_States_Director_of_National_Intelligence
United_States_Disciplinary_Barracks
United_States_Disciplinary_Barracks
United_States_District_Attorney
United_States_district_attorney
United_States_District_Court
United_States_district_court
United_States_district_court
United_States_District_Courts
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Central_District_of_California
United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Columbia
United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Hawaii
United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_New_Jersey
United_States_District_Court_for_the_District_of_Pennsylvania
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Pennsylvania
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Eastern_District_of_Virginia
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Middle_District_of_Florida
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_Georgia
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_Ohio
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_Mariana_Islands
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_New_York
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Southern_District_of_Ohio
United_States_District_Court_for_the_Western_District_of_Texas
United_States_Dollar
United_States_dollar
United_States_dollar
United_states_dollar
United_States_dollars
United_States_dollar_coin
United_States_dollar_coin
United_States_dollar_twenty_dollar_bill
United_States_D_class_submarine
United_States_East_Coast
United_States_Economy
United_States_education_by_state
United_states_election
United_States_election_results
United_States_Electoral_College
United_States_embargoes
United_States_embargo_against_Cuba
United_States_embargo_against_Cuba
United_States_Embassy
United_States_Embassy_in_Ottawa
United_States_embassy_in_Ottawa
United_States_Energy_Information_Administration
United_States_Enrichment_Corpoation
United_States_Enrichment_Corpoation
United_States_Enrichment_Corporation
United_States_Enrichment_Corporation
United_States_environmental_law
United_States_environmental_law
United_States_environmental_organizations
United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency
United_States_European_Command
United_States_executive_branch
United_States_Executive_Departments
United_States_executive_orders
United_States_Executive_Order_1
United_States_Executive_Order_6102
United_States_Executive_Order_6102
United_States_Executive_Order_9066
United_States_Executive_Order_9066
United_States_Exploring_Expedition
United_States_Exploring_Expedition,_1838-1842
United_States_Exploring_Expedition,_1838-1842
United_States_Extemporaneous_Speaking
United_States_Extemporanious_Speaking
United_States_E_class_submarine
United_States_Federalist_Party
United_States_Federalist_Party
United_States_Federalist_Party
United_States_federal_academies
United_States_federal_academies
United_States_federal_agencies
United_States_Federal_Aviation_Administration
United_States_Federal_Census
United_States_federal_civil_procedure_doctrines
United_States_Federal_Court
United_States_federal_court
United_States_Federal_Courts
United_States_federal_courts
United_States_federal_court_system
United_States_Federal_Election_Committee
United_States_Federal_Executive_Departments
United_States_Federal_Executive_Departments
United_States_Federal_Government
United_States_Federal_government
United_States_federal_government
United_States_Federal_Income_Tax_Dependent_Deduction
United_States_Federal_Income_Tax_Dependent_Deduction
United_States_federal_judicial_circuit
United_States_federal_judicial_district
United_States_federal_judicial_district
United_States_Federal_judiciary
United_States_Federal_law_enforcement_agencies
United_States_Federal_Legislation
United_States_federal_legislation
United_States_Federal_Protective_Service
United_States_Federal_Railroad_Administration
United_States_Federal_Reserve_Bank
United_States_Federal_Rules_of_Evidence
United_States_Federation_of_Worker_Cooperatives
United_States_Fencing_Association
United_States_Fish_&_Wildlife_Service
United_States_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service
United_States_Fish_and_Wildlife_Service
United_States_five_cent_coin
United_States_five_cent_coin
United_States_five_dollar_bill
United_States_Flag
United_States_flag
United_states_flag
United_States_Flag_Code
United_States_Flag_Code
United_States_Fleet
United_States_FOIA
United_States_FOIA
United_States_Food_and_Drug_Administration
United_States_Football_League
United_States_Football_League_coaches
United_States_Football_League_players
United_States_forces
United_States_Forces_Japan
United_States_Foreign_Policy
United_States_foreign_policy
United_States_Foreign_Service
United_States_Foreign_Service
United_States_Forestry_Service
United_States_Forest_Service
United_States_Forest_Service_Rare_Plant_List
United_States_Free_Soil_Party
United_States_Free_Soil_Party
United_states_gallon
United_States_Generally_Accepted_Accounting_Principles
United_States_generally_accepted_accounting_principles
United_States_General_Accounting_Office
United_States_geography_by_state
United_States_Geological_Service
United_States_Geological_Survey
United_States_Geological_Survey
United_States_Geologic_Survey
United_States_geology
United_States_Golf_Association
United_States_Goverment
United_States_govermnent
United_States_Government
United_States_government
United_States_government_electronic_data_provider
United_States_government_images
United_States_government_images
United_States_Government_Printing_Office
United_States_government_sponsored_enterprise
United_States_government_stubs
United_States_Grand_Prix
United_States_Grand_Prix
United_States_Grand_Prix_East
United_States_Grand_Prix_East
United_States_Grand_Prix_West
United_States_Grand_Prix_West
United_States_Greenback_Party
United_States_Green_Berets
United_States_Green_Parties
United_States_Green_Parties
United_States_Green_Party
United_States_Green_Party
United_States_Gypsum
United_States_G_class_submarine
United_States_half_cent_coin
United_States_half_dollar_coin
United_States_Highway
United_States_highway
United_States_highways
United_States_Highway_1
United_States_Highway_1
United_States_Highway_10
United_States_Highway_101
United_States_highway_101
United_States_Highway_102
United_States_Highway_11
United_States_Highway_110
United_States_Highway_111
United_States_Highway_112
United_States_Highway_113
United_States_Highway_119
United_States_Highway_12
United_States_Highway_12
United_States_Highway_123
United_States_Highway_126
United_States_Highway_127
United_States_Highway_129
United_States_Highway_13
United_States_Highway_130
United_States_Highway_131
United_States_Highway_136
United_States_Highway_138
United_States_Highway_14
United_States_Highway_140
United_States_Highway_141
United_States_Highway_15
United_States_Highway_150
United_States_Highway_151
United_States_Highway_158
United_States_Highway_159
United_States_Highway_16
United_States_Highway_160
United_States_Highway_164
United_States_Highway_165
United_States_Highway_166
United_States_Highway_167
United_States_Highway_168
United_States_Highway_169
United_States_Highway_17
United_States_Highway_171
United_States_Highway_175
United_States_Highway_176
United_States_Highway_177
United_States_Highway_178
United_States_Highway_18
United_States_Highway_180
United_States_Highway_181
United_States_Highway_183
United_States_Highway_189
United_States_Highway_19
United_States_Highway_190
United_States_Highway_191
United_States_Highway_192
United_States_Highway_195
United_States_Highway_197
United_States_Highway_199
United_States_Highway_2
United_States_Highway_20
United_States_Highway_201
United_States_Highway_202
United_States_Highway_206
United_States_Highway_209
United_States_Highway_21
United_States_Highway_211
United_States_Highway_212
United_States_Highway_219
United_States_Highway_22
United_States_Highway_221
United_States_Highway_222
United_States_Highway_223
United_States_Highway_224
United_States_Highway_23
United_States_Highway_230
United_States_Highway_231
United_States_Highway_24
United_States_Highway_240
United_States_Highway_25
United_States_Highway_250
United_States_Highway_258
United_States_Highway_259
United_States_Highway_26
United_States_Highway_264
United_States_Highway_266
United_States_Highway_27
United_States_Highway_270
United_States_Highway_271
United_States_Highway_275
United_States_Highway_276
United_States_Highway_277
United_States_Highway_278
United_States_Highway_28
United_States_Highway_280
United_States_Highway_281
United_States_Highway_283
United_States_Highway_285
United_States_Highway_287
United_States_Highway_29
United_States_Highway_3
United_States_Highway_30
United_States_Highway_301
United_States_Highway_302
United_States_Highway_31
United_States_Highway_310
United_States_Highway_311
United_States_Highway_319
United_States_Highway_32
United_States_Highway_321
United_States_Highway_322
United_States_Highway_33
United_States_Highway_331
United_States_Highway_34
United_States_Highway_340
United_States_Highway_341
United_States_Highway_35
United_States_Highway_350
United_States_Highway_36
United_States_Highway_360
United_States_Highway_366
United_States_Highway_37
United_States_Highway_370
United_States_Highway_371
United_States_Highway_377
United_States_Highway_378
United_States_Highway_38
United_States_Highway_380
United_States_Highway_383
United_States_Highway_385
United_States_Highway_39
United_States_Highway_395
United_States_highway_395
United_States_Highway_4
United_States_Highway_40
United_States_Highway_400
United_States_Highway_401
United_States_Highway_41
United_States_Highway_410
United_States_Highway_411
United_States_Highway_412
United_States_Highway_42
United_States_Highway_421
United_States_Highway_425
United_States_Highway_43
United_States_Highway_431
United_States_Highway_44
United_States_Highway_441
United_States_Highway_45
United_States_Highway_46
United_States_Highway_460
United_States_Highway_466
United_States_Highway_47
United_States_Highway_470
United_States_Highway_48
United_States_Highway_49
United_States_Highway_491
United_States_Highway_5
United_States_Highway_50
United_States_Highway_501
United_States_Highway_51
United_States_Highway_52
United_States_Highway_521
United_States_Highway_522
United_States_Highway_53
United_States_Highway_54
United_States_Highway_541
United_States_Highway_55
United_States_Highway_550
United_States_Highway_56
United_States_Highway_566
United_States_Highway_57
United_States_Highway_58
United_States_Highway_59
United_States_Highway_6
United_States_Highway_60
United_States_Highway_601
United_States_Highway_61
United_States_Highway_62
United_States_Highway_63
United_States_Highway_630
United_States_Highway_64
United_States_Highway_641
United_States_Highway_65
United_States_Highway_66
United_States_Highway_666
United_States_Highway_66_--_Historic
United_States_Highway_66_--_Historic
United_States_Highway_66_–_Historic
United_States_Highway_67
United_States_Highway_68
United_States_Highway_69
United_States_Highway_7
United_States_Highway_70
United_States_Highway_701
United_States_Highway_71
United_States_Highway_72
United_States_Highway_73
United_States_Highway_74
United_States_Highway_75
United_States_Highway_76
United_States_Highway_77
United_States_Highway_78
United_States_Highway_79
United_States_Highway_8
United_States_Highway_80
United_States_Highway_81
United_States_Highway_82
United_States_Highway_83
United_States_Highway_84
United_States_Highway_85
United_States_Highway_86
United_States_Highway_87
United_States_Highway_88
United_States_Highway_89
United_States_Highway_9
United_States_Highway_90
United_States_Highway_91
United_States_Highway_92
United_States_Highway_93
United_States_Highway_94
United_States_Highway_95
United_States_Highway_96
United_States_Highway_97
United_States_highway_97
United_States_Highway_98
United_States_Highway_99
United_States_highway_99
United_States_Highway_99_--_Historic
United_States_Highway_System
United_States_Highway_system
United_States_Highway_system
United_States_hip_hop
United_States_historians
United_States_historians
United_States_historical_documents
United_States_History
United_States_history
United_States_history
United_States_history
United_States_history
United_States_history/U.S._History_map
United_States_history_stubs
United_States_History_timeline
United_States_Hockey_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_Hockey_Hall_of_Fame
United_States_Hockey_League
United_States_Hockey_League
United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum
United_States_Holocaust_Memorial_Museum
United_States_horse_races
United_States_Hot_Rod_Association
United_States_House
United_States_House_Committee_on_Education_and_the_Workforce
United_States_House_Committee_on_the_Judiciary
United_States_House_election,_2004
United_States_House_of_Representatives
United_States_House_of_Representatives
United_States_House_of_Representatives
United_states_house_of_representatives
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Hawaii_District_1
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Hawaii_District_2
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_1
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_1
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_10
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_11
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_12
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_13
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_14
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_15
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_16
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_17
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_18
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_19
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_2
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_20
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_21
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_22
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_23
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_24
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_25
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_26
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_27
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_28
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_29
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_3
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_30
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_31
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_32
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_4
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_5
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_6
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_7
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_8
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_Texas_District_9
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_1
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_10
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_11
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_12
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_13
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_14
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_15
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_16
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_17
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_18
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_19
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_2
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_20
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_3
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_4
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_5
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_6
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_7
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_8
United_States_House_of_Representatives,_TX_District_9
United_States_House_of_Representatives/Committees
United_States_House_of_Representatives/List_of_Committees
United_States_House_of_Representatives_committees
United_States_House_of_Representatives_Committee_on_Appropriations
United_States_House_of_Representatives_Committee_on_the_Judiciary
United_States_House_of_Represntatives
United_States_H_class_submarine
United_States_Immigration_Act
United_States_Immigration_Act
United_States_Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement
United_States_Immigration_and_Customs_Enforcement
United_States_immigration_law
United_States_imperialism
United_States_infobox
United_States_infobox
United_States_Information_Agency
United_States_Information_Agency
United_States_Information_Service
United_States_Insular_areas
United_States_intellectual_property_law
United_States_Internal_Revenue_Service
United_States_International_Trade_Commission
United_States_International_Trade_Commission
United_States_invasion_of_Afghanistan
United_States_invasion_of_Iraq
United_States_invasion_of_Iraq
United_States_in_Congress_Assembled
United_States_in_Prophecy
United_States_in_the_1950s
United_States_isolationism
United_States_isolationism
United_States_Jewish_history
United_States_Joint_Forces_Command
United_States_judicial_branch
United_States_Junior_Chamber
United_States_Junior_Chamber_of_Commerce
United_States_Justice_Department
United_States_Know-Nothing_Party
United_States_K_class_submarine
United_States_Labor_Department
United_States_labor_law
United_States_Labor_Party
United_States_Labor_Party
United_States_labor_unions
United_States_language
United_States_law
United_States_law
United_States_laws
United_States_law_enforcement_agencies
United_States_law_enforcement_decorations
United_States_law_enforcement_decorations
United_States_legal_history
United_States_liberalism
United_States_Liberal_Republican_Party
United_States_Libertarian_Party
United_States_Libertarian_Party
United_States_Liberty_Party
United_States_Library_of_Congress
United_States_Life_Saving_Service
United_States_Lighthouse_Service
United_States_Light_House_Service
United_States_Lines
United_States_list_of_events
United_States_locations_by_per_capita_income
United_States_L_class_submarine
United_States_magazines
United_States_maps
United_States_Marine
United_States_Marines
United_States_Marine_Corp
United_States_Marine_Corps
United_States_Marine_Corps
United_States_Marine_Corps
United_States_Marine_corps
United_States_Marine_Corps/Part_of_the_Navy_discussion
United_States_Marine_Corps_Reserve
United_States_Maritime_Commission
United_States_Marshal
United_States_Marshals_Service
United_States_Marshal_Service
United_States_Masters_Swimming
United_States_Medal_of_Freedom
United_States_media
United_States_media
United_States_media_by_state
United_States_media_history
United_States_Medical_Licensure_Examination
United_States_Memorials
United_States_Memorials
United_States_men's_national_soccer_team
United_States_mens_national_soccer_team
United_States_Merchant_Marine
United_States_Merchant_Marine
United_States_Merchant_Marines
United_States_Merchant_Marine_Academy
United_States_Merchant_Marine_ships
United_States_metropolitan_area
United_States_metropolitan_area
United_States_metropolitan_areas
United_States_Mexico_barrier
United_States_Mexico_barrier
United_States_micropolitan_area
United_States_Mid-Atlantic_region
United_States_Military
United_States_military
United_States_military
United_States_military_academies
United_States_military_academies
United_States_Military_Academy
United_States_Military_Academy
United_States_military_award_devices
United_States_military_badges
United_States_military_bases
United_States_Military_Entrance_Processing_Command
United_States_military_history
United_States_military_hospitals
United_States_Military_Lands
United_States_military_law
United_States_military_medical_facilities
United_States_military_memorials_and_cemeteries
United_States_military_nuclear_incident_terminology
United_States_military_nuclear_incident_terminology
United_States_Military_Oath_of_Allegiance
United_States_Military_Oath_of_Allegiance
United_States_Military_Oath_of_Allegience
United_States_military_policies
United_States_military_research_facilities
United_States_Military_Sealift_Command
United_States_Minor_Outlying_Islands
United_States_Mint
United_States_Mint
United_States_mint
United_States_motion_picture_companies
United_States_Motor_Company
United_States_municipal_police_departments
United_States_music
United_States_musicians
United_States_musicians
United_States_music_history
United_States_M_class_submarine
United_States_nationalism
United_States_National_Academies
United_States_National_Academy_of_Sciences
United_States_National_Arboretum
United_States_National_Chemistry_Olympiad
United_States_national_cricket_team
United_States_National_Economic_Council
United_States_National_Film_Registry
United_States_National_Film_Registry
United_States_national_football_team
United_states_national_football_team
United_States_National_Forests
United_States_National_Guard
United_States_National_Guard
United_States_National_Guard
United_States_National_Guard_36th_Infantry_Division
United_States_National_Historic_Landmark
United_States_national_hockey_team
United_States_National_Lawn_Tennis_Association
United_States_National_Library_of_Medicine
United_States_national_men's_hockey_team
United_States_national_men's_soccer_team
United_States_National_Monument
United_States_National_Monument
United_States_National_Nuclear_Security_Administration
United_States_National_Park
United_States_National_Park
United_States_National_Parks
United_States_National_Parks_Service
United_States_National_Park_Service
United_States_national_radio_quiet_zone
United_States_National_Republican_Party
United_States_National_Republican_Party
United_States_National_Research_Council
United_States_National_Reserve
United_States_national_rugby_league_team
United_States_national_rugby_union_team
United_States_National_Security
United_States_National_Security
United_States_National_Security_Advisor
United_States_National_Security_Advisor
United_States_National_Security_Advisors
United_States_National_Security_Advisors
United_States_National_Security_Council
United_States_national_security_policy
United_States_National_Soccer_Team
United_States_national_soccer_team
United_States_National_Spelling_Bee
United_States_National_Spelling_Bee
United_States_National_Statesman_Party
United_States_Natural_Law_Party
United_States_Natural_Law_Party
United_States_Naval_Academy
United_States_Naval_Academy
United_States_Naval_Academy
United_States_naval_architect
United_States_naval_architect
United_states_naval_architect
United_States_Naval_Institute
United_States_Naval_Observatory
United_States_Naval_reactor
United_States_Naval_reactor
United_States_Naval_reactors
United_States_Naval_reactors
United_States_Naval_Reserve
United_States_Naval_Sea_Cadet_Corps
United_States_Naval_Special_Warfare_Command
United_States_Naval_War_College
United_States_Naval_Weapons_Center
United_States_Navy
United_States_Navy
United_States_Navy
United_States_Navy_1975_ship_reclassification
United_States_Navy_1975_ship_reclassification
United_States_Navy_airships
United_States_Navy_air_stations
United_States_Navy_air_stations
United_States_Navy_amphibious_assault_ships
United_States_Navy_Armed_Guard
United_States_Navy_auxiliary_ships
United_States_Navy_barques
United_States_Navy_bases
United_States_Navy_battleships
United_States_Navy_brigs
United_States_Navy_cargo_ships
United_States_Navy_Construction_Battallion
United_States_Navy_Construction_Battallions
United_States_Navy_cruisers
United_States_Navy_cutters
United_States_Navy_Department
United_States_Navy_destroyer_escorts
United_States_Navy_facilities
United_States_Navy_frigates
United_States_Navy_gunboats
United_States_Navy_hospital_ships
United_States_Navy_ketchs
United_States_Navy_League
United_States_Navy_Mark_11_Mod_0_Sniper_Weapon_System
United_States_Navy_Mark_11_Mod_0_Sniper_Weapon_System
United_States_Navy_Mark_12_Mod_0_Special_Purpose_Rifle
United_States_Navy_Mark_12_Mod_0_Special_Purpose_Rifle
United_States_Navy_Mark_12_Mod_X_Special_Purpose_Rifle
United_States_Navy_Mark_12_Mod_X_Special_Purpose_Rifle
United_States_Navy_Mark_14_Mod_0_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle
United_States_Navy_Mark_14_Mod_0_Enhanced_Battle_Rifle
United_States_Navy_minelayers
United_States_Navy_minesweepers
United_States_Navy_mine_warfare_ships
United_States_Navy_monitors
United_States_Navy_motorboats
United_States_Navy_patrol_boats
United_States_Navy_people
United_States_Navy_proposed_ships
United_States_Navy_protected_cruisers
United_States_Navy_Q-ships
United_States_Navy_Reserve
United_States_Navy_reserve_fleets
United_States_Navy_schooners
United_States_Navy_SEAL
United_States_Navy_SEALS
United_States_Navy_SEALs
United_States_Navy_ships
United_States_Navy_ships
United_States_Navy_ships_of_the_line
United_States_Navy_shipyards
United_States_Navy_ship_types
United_States_Navy_sloops
United_States_Navy_Special_Warfare_Command
United_States_Navy_squadrons
United_States_Navy_steamships
United_States_Navy_submarines
United_States_Navy_tank_landing_ships
United_States_Navy_transports
United_States_Navy_tugs
United_States_Navy_Working_Capital_Fund
United_States_Navy_Working_Capital_Fund_(NWCF)
United_States_Navy_Yard,_New_York
United_States_newspapers
United_States_newspapers
United_States_newspaper_companies
United_States_New_Alliance_Party
United_States_nickel
United_States_Northern_Command
United_States_Northwest_Territory
United_States_Northwest_Territory
United_States_Note
United_States_note
United_States_Notes
United_States_Notes
United_States_notes
United_States_N_class_submarine
United_States_Office_of_Economic_Opportunity
United_States_Office_of_Faith-Based_and_Community_Initiatives
United_States_Office_of_Faith_Based_and_Community_Initiatives
United_States_Office_of_Homeland_Security
United_States_Office_of_Management_and_Budget
United_States_Office_of_Management_and_Budget
United_States_Office_of_the_Independent_Counsel
United_States_Office_of_the_Independent_Counsel
United_States_Office_of_the_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Office_of_War_Information
United_States_official_documents
United_States_of_Africa
United_States_Of_Amerca
United_States_Of_America
United_States_of_America
United_States_of_America
United_states_of_america
United_States_of_America/Communications
United_States_of_America/Currency
United_States_of_America/Economy
United_States_of_America/Foreign_relations
United_States_of_America/Geography
United_States_of_America/Government
United_States_of_America/Introduction
United_States_of_America/List_of_federal_agencies
United_States_of_America/Military
United_States_of_America/Military
United_States_of_America/OldPage
United_States_of_America/People
United_States_of_America/Political_parties
United_States_of_America/Political_parties
United_States_of_America/Poverty
United_States_of_America/Standard_of_living
United_States_of_America/Standard_of_living
United_States_of_America/Temp
United_States_of_America/Transnational_Issues
United_States_of_America/Transportation
United_States_of_America_at_the_2000_Summer_Olympics
United_States_of_America_at_the_2004_Summer_Olympics
United_States_of_America_Biology_Olympiad
United_states_of_america_biology_olympiad
United_States_of_America_Centennial_Exposition
United_States_of_America_cities
United_States_of_America_Computing_Olympiad
United_States_of_America_Constitution
United_States_of_America_Mathematical_Olympiad
United_States_of_America_Mathematical_Talent_Search
United_States_of_America_Mathematics_Olympiad
United_States_of_America_military_aircraft_designation_systems
United_States_of_America_non-profit_laws
United_States_of_America_Standards_Institute
United_States_of_America_v._Extreme_Associates
United_States_of_Brasil
United_States_of_Canada
United_States_of_Central_America
United_States_of_Central_America
United_States_of_Europe
United_States_of_Europe
United_states_of_europe
United_States_of_Mexico
United_States_of_Mind_(album)
United_States_of_Mind_(album)
United_States_of_South_America
United_States_Olympic_Committee
United_States_one_cent_coin
United_States_one_dollar_banknote
United_States_one_dollar_bill
United_States_Open_Championship
United_States_Open_Tennis_Championships
United_States_Order_of_Precedence
United_States_Order_of_Precedence
United_States_order_of_precedence
United_States_order_of_precedence
United_States_organizations
United_States_O_class_submarine
United_States_Pacific_Air_Forces
United_States_Pacific_Command
United_States_Pacing_Triple_Crown_races
United_States_painters
United_States_painters
United_States_parks
United_States_parks
United_States_Park_Police
United_States_Park_Service
United_States_Patents_and_Trademarks_Office
United_States_Patent_&_Trademark_Office
United_States_Patent_and_Trademark_Office
United_States_patent_and_trademark_office
United_States_Patent_Office
United_States_Patriot_Party
United_States_Peace_and_Freedom_Party
United_States_Peace_Corps
United_States_Penitentiary,_Beaumont
United_States_Penitentiary,_Leavenworth
United_States_Penitentiary,_Terre_Haute
United_States_penny
United_States_People's_Party
United_States_perception_of_Osama_Bin_Laden
United_States_perception_of_Osama_Bin_Laden
United_States_perception_of_Osama_bin_Laden
United_States_Permanent_Resident_Card
United_States_Permanent_Resident_Card
United_States_Personal_Choice_Party
United_States_Pharmacopoeia
United_States_Pharmacopoeia
United_States_physiographic_region
United_States_poetry
United_States_Political_Leadership_in_World_War_II
United_States_Political_Party_Structure
United_States_Politics
United_States_politics
United_States_politics_stubs
United_States_popular_culture
United_States_Populist_Party
United_States_Populist_Party
United_States_Porpoise_class_submarine
United_States_Porpoise_class_submarine
United_States_Porpoise_class_submarine
United_States_Porpoise_class_submarines
United_States_Postal_Service
United_States_Postal_Service
United_States_Postal_Service
United_States_Postmaster_General
United_States_Postmaster_General
United_States_Post_Office
United_States_Post_Office_Department
United_States_Preserve
United_States_Presidency
United_States_President
United_States_presidential_candidates
United_States_presidential_candidates
United_States_Presidential_debate
United_States_Presidential_debates
United_States_presidential_debates
United_States_Presidential_Election
United_States_presidential_election
United_States_presidential_election,_1872
United_States_presidential_election,_1992
United_States_presidential_election,_2000
United_States_presidential_election,_2004
United_States_presidential_election,_2008
United_States_Presidential_Elections
United_States_Presidential_elections
United_States_presidential_elections
United_States_Presidential_election_of_1860
United_States_presidential_electors,_2004
United_States_Presidential_Line_of_Succession
United_States_Presidential_line_of_succession
United_States_Presidential_line_of_succession
United_States_presidential_line_of_succession
United_States_presidential_line_of_succession
United_States_President_George_W._Bush_speech_to_Congress_on_September_20_2001
United_States_President_George_W._Bush_speech_to_Congress_on_September_20_2001:
United_States_prison_population
United_States_prison_population
United_States_private_paramilitary_groups
United_States_Professional_Championship
United_States_Progressive_Party
United_States_Progressive_Party
United_States_Prohibition_Party
United_States_Prohibition_Party
United_States_Pro_Championship
United_States_Public_Health_Service
United_States_quarter
United_States_quarter
United_States_radio
United_States_radio_networks
United_States_radio_personalities
United_States_railfanning_locations
United_States_railroads
United_States_Railroad_Administration
United_States_railroad_executives
United_States_railroad_holding_companies
United_States_railroad_museums_and_tourist_lines
United_States_railroad_regulation
United_States_railway_history
United_States_Range
United_States_rappers
United_States_Reclamation_Service
United_States_Reform_Party
United_States_Reform_Party
United_States_regional_and_state_political_parties
United_States_Regional_Cuisine
United_States_regions
United_States_religious_history
United_States_religious_history
United_States_Representative
United_States_Republican_Party
United_States_Republican_Party
United_States_Republican_party
United_States_Republic_Party
United_States_Revolutionary_War
United_States_road_stubs
United_States_Route_99
United_States_Rules_of_Evidence
United_States_R_class_submarine
United_States_Satellite_Broadcasting
United_States_scientists
United_States_sculptors
United_States_Seated_Liberty_coinage
United_States_Secretaries_of_Health,_Education,_and_Welfare
United_States_Secretary_for_Foreign_Affairs
United_States_Secretary_of_Agriculture
United_States_Secretary_of_Agriculture
United_States_Secretary_of_Commerce
United_States_Secretary_of_Commerce
United_States_Secretary_of_Commerce_and_Labor
United_States_Secretary_of_Defence
United_States_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Secretary_of_Defense
United_States_Secretary_of_Education
United_States_Secretary_of_Energy
United_States_Secretary_of_Foreign_Affairs
United_States_Secretary_of_foreign_affairs
United_States_Secretary_of_Health,_Education,_and_Welfare
United_States_Secretary_of_Health_and_Human_Services
United_States_Secretary_of_Homeland_Security
United_States_Secretary_of_Housing_and_Urban_Development
United_States_Secretary_of_Housing_and_Urban_Development
United_States_Secretary_of_Labor
United_States_Secretary_of_Labour
United_States_Secretary_of_State
United_States_Secretary_of_State
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Air_Force
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Army
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Interior
United_States_secretary_of_the_interior
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Navy
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Navy
United_States_Secretary_of_the_Treasury
United_States_Secretary_of_Transportation
United_States_Secretary_of_Treasury
United_States_Secretary_of_Veterans_Affairs
United_States_Secretary_of_Veterans_Affairs
United_States_Secretary_of_War
United_States_Secret_Service
United_States_Secret_Service
United_states_secret_service
United_States_securities_law
United_States_security_treaty_Australia_New_Zealand
United_States_Senate
United_States_Senate
United_States_Senate
United_States_senate
United_States_Senate_Committee_on_Finance
United_States_Senate_Committee_on_the_Judiciary
United_States_Senate_Democratic_Conference_Chairman
United_States_Senate_Democratic_Policy_Committee_Chairman
United_States_Senate_Democratic_Whip
United_States_Senate_Finance_Committee
United_States_Senate_Majority_Leader
United_States_Senate_Majority_Whip
United_States_Senate_Minority_Leader
United_States_Senate_Minority_Whip
United_States_Senate_Republican_Conference_Chairman
United_States_Senate_Republican_Policy_Committee_Chairman
United_States_Senate_Republican_Whip
United_States_Senate_Select_Committee_on_Intelligence
United_States_Senator
United_States_senator
United_States_Senators
United_States_Senators
United_States_Senators_by_state
United_States_Senators_from_1789
United_States_Sentencing_Commission
United_States_service_academies
United_States_service_medals_of_the_World_Wars
United_States_sheriffs'_departments
United_States_Ship
United_States_Shipping_Board
United_States_shopping_malls
United_States_singers
United_States_Sixth_Fleet
United_States_Small_Business_Administration
United_States_soccer
United_States_soccer_clubs
United_States_soccer_clubs_(defunct)
United_States_soccer_coaches
United_States_soccer_competitions
United_States_soccer_competitions_(defunct)
United_States_Soccer_Federation
United_States_soccer_league_system
United_States_soccer_players
United_States_soccer_stadiums
United_States_soccer_teams
United_States_soccer_teams
United_States_Socialist-Labor_Party
United_States_Socialist_Equality_Party
United_States_Socialist_Party
United_States_Social_Problems
United_States_Social_Problems
United_States_Solicitor_General
United_States_South
United_States_Southeast
United_States_Southern_Command
United_States_Southern_States
United_States_South_Sea_Surveying_and_Exploring_Expedition
United_States_Space_Command
United_States_space_program
United_States_Speaker_of_the_House
United_States_Speaker_of_the_House_of_Representatives
United_States_specialist_police_departments
United_States_Special_Army_Cadets_Program
United_States_special_forces
United_States_Special_Operations_Command
United_States_State
United_States_state
United_States_state_capitals
United_States_state_capitals
United_States_state_constitution
United_States_state_constitution
United_States_State_Department
United_States_state_law_enforcement_agencies
United_States_Statutes_at_Large
United_States_Steel_Corp.
United_States_Steel_Corporation
United_States_Steel_Hour
United_States_steel_tariff_2002
United_States_steel_tariff_2002
United_States_Strategic_Air_Forces
United_States_Strategic_Command
United_States_Students'_Unions
United_States_Student_Association
United_States_Student_Press_Association
United_States_student_societies
United_States_student_sororities
United_States_submarines_designated_as_memorials
United_States_submarines_lost
United_States_submarines_lost
United_States_Supreme_Court
United_States_Supreme_Court
United_States_Supreme_Court/Chief_Justice
United_States_Supreme_Court_Chief_Justice
United_States_Supreme_Court_Opinions
United_States_Supreme_Court_Reporters_of_Decisions
United_States_Supreme_Court_Reporter_of_Decisions
United_States_Surgeon_General
United_States_S_class_submarine
United_States_S_class_submarine
United_States_S_class_submarine
United_States_S_class_submarine
United_States_S_class_submarines
United_States_tallest_structures
United_States_Tank_Landing_Ships
United_States_tariff_acts
United_States_Taxpayers_Party
United_States_Tax_Court
United_States_Tax_Reform
United_States_tax_reform
United_States_technological_and_industrial_history
United_States_technological_and_industrial_history
United_States_technological_history
United_States_Telecom_Association
United_States_television_programme_stubs
United_States_television_writers
United_States_Tennis_Association
United_States_territorial_acquisitions
United_States_territorial_acquisitions
United_States_Territories
United_States_Territory
United_States_territory
United_States_territory
United_States_three_cent_coin
United_States_three_cent_coin
United_States_time_zones
United_States_Tort
United_States_tort_case_law
United_States_tort_law
United_States_trademark_law
United_States_trade_law
United_States_Trade_Representative
United_States_Trade_Representatives
United_States_Transportation_Command
United_States_Treasurer
United_States_Treasury
United_States_treasury_bond
United_States_Treasury_Department
United_States_Treasury_Secretary
United_States_treaties
United_States_Triple_Crown_Races
United_States_Trotting_Triple_Crown_races
United_States_Trustee
United_States_twenty_cent_coin
United_States_twenty_cent_coin
United_States_twenty_dollar_bill
United_States_Two_Cent_Coin
United_States_two_cent_coin
United_States_two_cent_coin
United_States_Two_dollar_bill
United_States_two_dollar_bill
United_States_T_class_submarine
United_States_Uniformed_Services
United_States_Union_Party
United_States_v._Alfonso_Lopez,_Jr.
United_States_v._Benitez
United_States_v._Booker
United_States_v._Butler
United_States_v._Butler_et_al
United_States_v._Butler_et_al.
United_States_v._Carolene_Products_Co.
United_States_v._Carroll_Towing_Co.
United_States_v._Continental_Can_Co.
United_States_v._Cruikshank
United_States_v._Cruikshank
United_States_v._Curtiss-Wright_Export_Corp.
United_States_v._Curtiss-Wright_Export_Corp.
United_States_v._E.C._Knight_Company
United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Co.
United_States_v._E._C._Knight_Company
United_States_v._Eichman
United_States_v._Eichman
United_States_v._Emerson
United_States_v._Klein
United_States_v._LaRouche
United_States_v._LaRouche
United_States_v._LaRouche/sandbox
United_States_v._Lopez
United_States_v._Lopez
United_States_v._Microsoft
United_States_v._Microsoft
United_States_v._Miller
United_States_v._Morrison
United_States_v._National_City_Lines_Inc.
United_States_v._Nixon
United_States_v._Nixon
United_States_v._O'Brien
United_States_v._Paramount_Pictures,_Inc.
United_States_v._Place
United_States_v._Raines
United_States_v._Reynolds
United_States_v._Ross
United_States_v._Shabani
United_States_v._Southwestern_Cable_Co.
United_States_v._Stewart
United_States_v._The_Amistad
United_States_v._Trans-Missouri_Freight_Association
United_States_v._Verdugo-Urquidez
United_States_v._Wong_Kim_Ark
United_States_v._X-Citement_Video
United_States_Veterans'_Bureau
United_States_Veterans_Bureau
United_States_Veterans’_Bureau
United_States_vice-presidential_candidates
United_States_Vice_President
United_States_Virgin_Islands
United_States_Visitor_and_Immigrant_Status_Indicator_Technology
United_States_vs._Nixon
United_States_wars
United_States_wars
United_States_War_Crimes
United_States_War_Department
United_States_War_of_Independence
United_States_Weather_Bureau
United_States_West
United_States_Whig_Party
United_States_Whig_party
United_States_wines
United_States_women's_national_football_team
United_States_women's_national_soccer_team
United_States_Women's_Polo_Federation
United_States_Wrestling_Association


These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL



YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
encyklopedia online