Advance Apologies to the good people of Enumclaw
I remember when I first learned about wikipedia, which for all its faults and for the way it maddens educators is an essential website. I posted something online about Floyd Paxton and saw that a discussion had popped up with the wikipedia denziens on wheter his invention warranted an entry. Floyd Paxton, of Selah, Washington, invented the “Kwik Lok” bread fastener, and founded the Kwik Lok Corporation. I am referring to the bread-clip. He ran for the Republican nomination for governor of Washington State and was a member in good standing in the John Birch Society. Not being an authorative source, and being non specific on everything, the entry was rejected.
I think it may be time for someone or someones to dredge up some primary sources and authorities, and force something on Floyd Paxton, and “Kwik Lok Corporation”, and bread-clip or fastener.
A comment I made on this blog referenced the Enumclaw Incident. This spurred me to a look up of “Enumclaw” at wikipedia to see how much the Horse incident figured in that article. Lo and behold, the first thing on the page is a link that directs you to the man by way of the “Enumclaw Horse Incident”. But that is all. The discussion section, however, is dominated by disputes over the proper role of the occurence in discussing Enumclaw — indeed, other than two comments concerning the municipality’s boundaries, that is all there is over there. The decision was made to leave the horse out of the wikipedia entry, which is probably the right decision. But the opening link probably more than makes up for the Mercy Granted to Enumclaw.
And then there is that horse dealy thing. What we seem to have with the discussion are some demands to link to a related horse video, apparently popular in some corners of the Internet. When the video link is dismissed as not being necessary — and it is the very definition of “gratuitous” — with an apologetic reference to censorship in other countries, it’s met with the “Censorship” charge, a foreboding of its implications in the free world. I suppose there is a point — it’s an excuse that masks the real reason (gratuitous)… meanwhile there reamins an entry on “Tiananmen Square”, surely not seen by anyone in China right now.
Also we get some very detailed matter-of-fact disucssion of the minutiae of the act itself. Which, I suppose, means that anyone who thinks the actual entry skips over too much information has back-up information available at their disposal.
To cleanse the pallete, I suggest a look at the entry for the “Connecticut for Lieberman Party“, with the question — regarding this moment in the party’s history:
On August 9, 2006, the day following the primary, Lieberman supporter Stuart R. Korchin changed his party registration to Connecticut for Lieberman.[9] The change was not entered in the state’s electronic voter database, however.[10]
This part of the dispute is essential to who controls the party right now, so:  is this claim an act of retro-fitting to clear over the problem of not having that single member when Orman took control of the party? Was this he just simply covering his tracks?