text:
Eileen Barker

Eileen Vartan Barker (born 21 April 1938, in Edinburgh, UK) is a professor in sociology, an emeritus member of the London School of Economics (LSE), and a consultant to that institution's Centre for the Study of Human Rights. She is the chairperson and founder of the Information Network Focus on Religious Movements (INFORM) and has written studies about cults and new religious movements.

Academic career
Barker has been involved with the LSE's sociology department, where she received her PhD, since 1970.

In 1988, she engaged in research on the preservation of cultural identity in the Armenian diaspora. In the same year, she founded the Information Network Focus on Religious Movements (INFORM) with the support of the Archbishop of Canterbury and financial help from the British Home Office.

Barker has held numerous positions of leadership in the academic study of religion. She served as the chairperson of the British Sociological Association's Study Group for the Sociology of Religion from 1985 to 1990, as president of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion from 1991 to 1993 (the first non-American to hold that office), and as president of the Association for the Sociology of Religion from 2001 to 2002.

In 2000, Barker became an Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) and the American Academy of Religion awarded her its Martin E. Marty Award for Contributions to the Public Understanding of Religion.

Barker was a member of the editorial review board of Cultic Studies Review, an academic journal that offered peer-reviewed scholarship alongside news concerning cults and new religious movements. Barker subsequently joined the editorial board of the International Journal of Cultic Studies, which superseded Cultic Studies Review in 2010.

The Making of a Moonie
Her 1984 book The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing? is based on close to seven years of study of Unification Church members (informally called "Moonies") in the United Kingdom and the United States. Laurence Iannaccone of George Mason University, a specialist in the economics of religion, wrote that The Making of a Moonie was "one of the most comprehensive and influential studies" of the process of conversion to new religious movements.

Opinions of others
Brainwashing proponents Margaret Singer and Janja Lalich have criticised Barker's rejection of the brainwashing hypothesis in her study of the conversion process for members of the Unification Church. Singer and Lalich, in their 1995 book Cults in Our Midst, called Barker a "procult apologist" for adopting an "apologist stance" towards the Unification Church, and noted that she had received payment from the Church for expenses for a book and eighteen conferences from the Unification Church. Barker defended this by stating that it had been approved by her university and a government grants council, and saved taxpayer money.

Barker responded to the financial issues in a 1995 paper, writing that "[w]hat is less well known is that vast amounts of money are at stake in the fostering of brainwashing and mind control thesis in the anti-cult movement secondary constructions", and noting that "deprogrammers" and "exit counselors" charge tens of thousands of dollars for their services and that "expert witnesses" such as Singer "have charged enormous fees for giving testimony about brainwashing in court cases".

Barker's INFORM organisation has been criticised by the Family Action Information Resource chaired by former Conservative Home Office minister and anti-cult campaigner Tom Sackville, who cut INFORM's Home Office funding in 1997. In 1999, it was reported that INFORM was facing closure, due to lack of funds. By 2000, Home Office funding was restored, prompting Sackville to warn that INFORM might provide government with bad advice, adding, "I cancelled INFORM's grant and I think it's absurd that it's been brought back". Criticism of INFORM has focused on Barker's reluctance to condemn all new religions as "cults". Barker responded to the criticism by saying, "We are not cult apologists. People make a lot of noise without doing serious research – so much so that they can end up sounding as closed to reason as the cults they're attacking. Besides, I imagine FAIR was disappointed not to get our funding".

In a 2003 collection of essays in honour of Barker, the influential Oxford University-based religious scholar Bryan R. Wilson commented that INFORM was "often in a position from which it can reassure relatives about the character, disposition, policy, provenance and prospects of a given movement. It may be able to deflate some widely circulated rumours and false impressions derived from media comment". Wilson added that Barker's social science research, in particular her work on the Unification Church, had been instrumental in demonstrating that the brainwashing concept, which for some years had enjoyed popularity in the media, was unable to explain what actually happened in the process of religious conversion, or to explain why so many members of new religious movements actually leave these movements again after a short period.

Australian psychologist Len Oakes and British psychiatry professor Anthony Storr, who have written critically about cults, gurus, new religious movements, and their leaders, have praised Barker's work on the Unification Church's conversion process.

Political career
Barker, a member of the Liberal Democrats, was an unsuccessful Queen's Park ward candidate in May 2002 and an unsuccessful Kenton ward candidate in May 2006.

Selected bibliography

 * Barker, Eileen In the Beginning: The Battle of Creationists Science against Evolutionism, article in the book edited by Roy Wallis On the Margin of Science: The Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge. Sociological Review Monograph 27, Keele, 1979, pp. 179–200
 * Barker, Eileen The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing?, Blackwell Publishers, November 1984, ISBN 0-631-13246-5
 * Barker, Eileen (editor) Of Gods and Men: New Religious Movements in the West Mercer University Press Macon, Georgia, USA 1984 ISBN 0-86554-095-0
 * Barker, Eileen New Religious Movements: A Practical Introduction (Paperback) Bernan Press (October 1990) ISBN 0-11-340927-3
 * Barker, Eileen, On freedom: a centenary anthology, Transaction Publishers, 1997, ISBN 1-56000-976-4 ISBN 9781560009764
 * Barker, Eileen. New Religions, Haft Asman (Seven Heavens), A Journal for the Center for Religious Studies, Vol. 4, no. 19, translated into Persian by Baqer Talebi Darabi, Autumn 2002.
 * Barker, Eileen "New Religious Movements" Religions and Beliefs in Britain (GCSE/A'level resource book), Craig Donnellan (ed.), Cambridge: Independence, 2005: 19–22.

title: Eileen Barker


text:
G-funk

G-funk, short for gangsta funk, (or funk rap ) is a sub-genre of gangsta rap that emerged from the West Coast scene in the early 1990s. The genre was heavily influenced by the synthesizer-heavy 1970s funk sound of Parliament-Funkadelic (aka P-Funk), often incorporated through samples or re-recordings. It was represented by commercially successful albums such as Dr. Dre's The Chronic (1992) and Snoop Dogg's Doggystyle (1993).

Characteristics
G-funk (which uses funk with an artificially altered tempo) incorporates multi-layered and melodic synthesizers, slow hypnotic grooves, a deep bass, heavy use of the snare drum, background female vocals, the extensive sampling of P-Funk tunes, and a high-pitched portamento saw wave synthesizer lead. G funk is typically set at between 90 and 100 BPM. The lyrical content depended on the artist and could consist of sex, drug use (especially marijuana), love for a city, love for friends. There was also a slurred "lazy" or "smooth" way of rapping in order to clarify words and stay in rhythmic cadence. Many R&B and pop singles of the 1990s incorporated the G-funk sound to their music.

The trademark West Coast G-funk style of hip-hop was a very defining element of the region's music and helped distinguish it from the rivaling rap scene on the East Coast. In essence, the smooth, slow-tempo sound of G-funk accompanied the perceived "laid-back" stereotype of Californian culture whereas East Coast hip-hop typically featured more aggressive attitudes alongside a fast-paced tempo (e.g. hardcore hip hop).

Unlike other earlier rap acts that also utilized funk samples (such as EPMD and the Bomb Squad), G-funk often utilized fewer, unaltered samples per song. Music theorist Adam Krims has described G-funk as "a style of generally West Coast rap whose musical tracks tend to deploy live instrumentation, heavy on bass and keyboards, with minimal (sometimes no) sampling and often highly conventional harmonic progressions and harmonies". Dr. Dre, a pioneer of the G-funk genre, normally uses live musicians to replay the original music of sampled records. This enabled him to produce music that had his own sounds, rather than a direct copy of the sample.

1989–1992: Beginnings
Early examples of the genre began to show up in 1989 with The D.O.C.'s "It's Funky Enough" and "The Formula", the former was an early minor hit for the genre, reaching No. 12 on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart. Two years later, in 1991, N.W.A. released another early example of the genre with their album Niggaz4Life, which reached No. 1 on the Billboard 200, and No. 2 on Billboard's Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums. The same year, Ice Cube's diss track towards N.W.A., "No Vaseline", was made in the style. Dr. Dre, who produced No One Can Do It Better and Niggaz4Life, is often seen as the originator/creator of the G-funk sound. Though these claims have been disputed with Cold 187um, a member of Above the Law, claiming that he came up with the name and sound.

1992–1997: Mainstream peak
1992 was the breakout year for the genre, with Dr. Dre dropping his album The Chronic. The album was a massive success, having three top 40 singles: "Nuthin' but a 'G' Thang", the Eazy-E diss "Dre Day", and "Let Me Ride." It also reached No. 3 on the Billboard 200, and No. 1 on the Top R&B/Hip-Hop Albums chart. The album was eventually certified Triple Platinum by the RIAA in 1993 for selling three-million copies, it has also been selected by the Library of Congress for preservation in the National Recording Registry for being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant". Though G-funk had previously existed, Dr. Dre's The Chronic is often seen as the beginning of the genre.

The following year had numerous successful songs and albums, Ice Cube's songs "It Was a Good Day" and "Check Yo Self" both made it to the top 20, peaking at No. 15 and No. 20 respectively, and were both certified at least gold. "It Was a Good Day" is commonly placed high on best of lists for the genre, being considered "one of the best G-Funk tracks ever made". Snoop Dogg released his first album Doggystyle, which debuted at No. 1 on the Billboard 200, and contained the hits "Gin and Juice" and "What's My Name?", both songs reached No. 8 on the Hot 100. The album was certified Quadruple Platinum, and both singles were certified gold. Eazy-E released the G-funk-influenced album It's On (Dr. Dre) 187um Killa, which reached No. 5 on the Billboard 200, and contained the No. 42 hit "Real Muthaphuckkin G's", which was made as a response to Dre's song "Dre Day" from the previous year.

The genre's popularity grew even bigger in 1994, especially because of Warren G's song "Regulate", which was featured on the Above The Rim soundtrack. The single reached the top 10 peaking at No. 2. His album Regulate... G Funk Era which also contained the song, and another top 10 hit "This D.J.", reached No. 2 on the Billboard 200. Popular rapper MC Hammer went for a more gangsta image and G-funk sound on his album The Funky Headhunter, which contained the No. 26 single "Pumps and a Bump". The G-funk group Thug Life, featuring 2Pac released their first and only album, Thug Life: Volume 1, it peaked at No. 42 on the Billboard 200, it had one minor hit single with "Cradle to the Grave", it charted on the Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs and on the Hot Rap Songs charts, at No. 91 on the former and No. 25 on the latter. Westcoast rapper Coolio released his debut album It Takes a Thief in 1994. The album peaked at No. 8, it contains the Top-10 hit "Fantastic Voyage".

In 1995, 2Pac released the album Me Against the World which although not entirely G-funk, has been described as having "half the record [resound] to the boom and bap of New York" while having "the rest [shimmer] in a G-funk haze". The album reached No. 1 on the Billboard 200, and was certified Double Platinum. Later in the year, he released the G-funk classic "California Love" which as a double A-side with "How Do U Want It", hit No. 1 on the Hot 100. In October 1995, Tha Dogg Pound released their debut album Dogg Food and it debuted at number 1# on the billboard, continuing G-funk's dominance in the mainstream with the top 50 singles "New York, New York" and "Let's Play House".

In 1996, the super-group Westside Connection released Bow Down. It had two hit singles, "Bow Down" and "Gangstas Make the World Go Round", which peaked at No. 21 and No. 40, respectively. The album itself peaked at No. 2 on the Billboard 200, and was certified Platinum by the RIAA in 1997. 2Pac released his album All Eyez on Me, which has been described as "lush G-funk" and as having a "commercial G-funk sheen". The album hit No. 1. In 1997 Warren G released his second album, Take a Look Over Your Shoulder, which peaked at No. 11 on the Billboard 200; it had two Top-40 singles, a cover of "I Shot the Sheriff" and "Smokin' Me Out".

Although the majority of G-funk music has come out of California, the overall sound has been utilized by additional US rappers and hip-hop groups that were based in other states across the U.S. during the time of the style's popularity in the 1990s. Some of the most notable of these artists include Outkast (Georgia), G-Slimm (Louisiana), Bone Thugs-n-Harmony (Ohio),   Tela (Tennessee), Top Authority (Michigan),  E.S.G. (Texas)  and DMG (Minnesota).

In the 1990s, Houston, Texas had a small, but noteworthy G-funk scene at the peak of the genre's popularity with artists such as the Geto Boys, Blac Monks, E.S.G., 5th Ward Boyz, Street Military, Big Mello, Scarface, Ganksta N-I-P, Bushwick Bill, Big 50, 5th Ward Juvenilez and South Circle.

1997–present: Influences on modern hip hop
In the late 1990s and 2000s, G-funk music significantly declined in mainstream popularity. Dr. Dre's 1999 album 2001, produced by Mel-Man, was noted as "reinvent[ing] his sound, moving away from G-funk to something more gothic and string-heavy."

In 2001 Warren G released his fourth studio album, The Return of the Regulator, including "Here Comes Another Hit" including Nate Dogg and Mista Grimm and Lookin' at You with LaToiya Williams. The album can be considered a return to the roots of G-funk West Coast gangsta music, but it sold less than the rapper's two previous albums.

Midwestern rapper Tech N9ne made use of the G-funk style on his early releases, most notably his second studio album, The Worst (2000). His 2001 follow-up album, Anghellic, incorporated the subgenre's characteristics to a much lesser extent.

Most recently, into the 2010s and onward, many contemporary West Coast rappers have released albums which contain strong G-funk influences, including Kendrick Lamar with Good Kid, M.A.A.D City as well as To Pimp a Butterfly, YG with Still Brazy, Schoolboy Q with Blank Face LP, Nipsey Hussle with Victory Lap, Buddy with Harlan & Alondra and Tech N9ne with The Gates Mixed Plate.

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

title: G-funk


text:
Worldbeat

Worldbeat is a music genre that blends pop music or rock music with world music or traditional music. Worldbeat is similar to other cross-pollination labels of contemporary and roots genres, and which suggest a rhythmic, harmonic or textural contrast between its modern and ethnic elements.

Definition
Worldbeat is akin to world fusion and global fusion, each of which primarily manifest as a blend of non-Western music tradition and Western, popular music. These particular music genres can also reflect in a cross-blend of more than one "traditional" flavor, producing innovative, hybrid expressions of world music. As with most "world"-laden genre categories, worldbeat is not clearly defined as are the many classic world music subgenres, such as gamelan, or calypso. In general, the expanding family of ethnic music subgenres under the world music umbrella represents an intrinsically nebulous terminology, which depending on how one interprets a particular hybrid of world music, can be interchangeable to a significant degree. Worldbeat defines a hybrid of what can be listed under the generalized world music term, even though it features a prominent interbreeding with elements of Western, pop music.

As an ethnically coloured genre, worldbeat is a part of the world music movement that is steadily influencing popular music in every corner of the globe. This is partially due to the advance of digital music production and the availability of high quality ethnic music samples to artists and producers in the recording arts. The globalization of texture and style between indigenous and modern music genres has rapidly expanded the scope of 21st century, popular music, and continues to reshape how the world defines the increasing number of genres conceived with world music elements.

Distinction relative to world music
Worldbeat, world fusion and global fusion are hybrid genres that have evolved under the world music genre. Their most prominent feature is an obvious meld between pop and indigenous culture, which often causes them to be indistinguishable from one another.

Contemporary genre hybrids with world music elements naturally proliferate in proportion to the globalization of music culture. In music catalogs, hybrid genres are often only given the database choice of "world", thus the perception of what can define world music has evolved to include pop influences.

There is disagreement whether all pop and traditional music hybrids exhibiting prominent ethno-influences, such as worldbeat, belong under the world music umbrella.

Similar terminology
Music genre terms that contain "world" are commonly subject to a very ambiguous consumer definition, due to the confusing similarity and overlapping interpretation of these categories. The world music category is inherently diverse, and offers wide possibilities for application in hybrid form, especially in mainstream, market-driven music. Worldbeat as a small subgenre of popular music has a mounting consumer-perception as a hybrid subgenre of world music, to the chagrin of world music purists. In its context as a liberally termed subgenre under the world music umbrella, worldbeat is very similar to world fusion and global fusion. The distinctions that delineate these hybrid, "world" terms are slight, and in many ways they are still being defined.

History
In the mid-1980s, eclectic musician Dan Del Santo hosted a "World Beat" show for the Austin, Texas radio station KUT that popularized the term. Mainstream artists were incorporating world music influences into their sound and popularizing the "world" term at the time, notably David Byrne, Peter Gabriel (who launched in 1982 the renowned and still running WOMAD Festival (World Of Music Art and Dance) and Paul Simon. Initially, the most prominent influences came from Africa,   Asia, South America (especially Brazil), the Middle East and Central America, though now encompass an ever-widening range of ethnic diversity. It has remained a thriving subgenre of popular and world music, while continuing to influence new artists, especially those appearing on today's growing roster of indie record labels (artist examples cited in section 2 of this article). Some of worldbeat's most successfully integrated folk elements include bossa nova, reggae, Afrobeat, mbaqanga, qawwali, highlife, rai, raga, Samba, flamenco and tango.

title: Worldbeat


text:
Church of Scotland

The Church of Scotland (The Kirk o Scotland; Eaglais na h-Alba) is a Presbyterian denomination of Christianity that holds the status of the national church in Scotland. It is one of the country's largest, having 259,200 members in 2023. While active membership in the church has declined significantly in recent decades (in 1982 it had nearly 920,000 members), the government Scottish Household Survey found that 20% of the Scottish population, or over one million people, identified the Church of Scotland as their religious identity in 2019. The Church of Scotland's governing system is presbyterian in its approach, therefore, no one individual or group within the church has more or less influence over church matters. There is no one person who acts as the head of faith, as the church believes that role is the "Lord God's". As a proper noun, the Kirk is an informal name for the Church of Scotland used in the media and by the church itself.

The Church of Scotland was principally shaped by John Knox, in the Reformation of 1560, when it split from the Catholic Church and established itself as a church in the Reformed tradition. The church belongs to the Presbyterian tradition of Reformed Christianity (Calvinism), having no head of faith or leadership group and believing that God invited the church's adherents to worship Jesus.

The Church of Scotland celebrates two sacraments, Baptism and the Lord's Supper, as well as five other ordinances, such as Confirmation and Matrimony. The church adheres to the Bible and the Westminster Confession of Faith, and is a member of the World Communion of Reformed Churches. The annual meeting of the church's general assembly is chaired by the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland.

Early traces
According to traditional Scottish historiography, the first Christians in Scotland were converted by Saint Ninian around 400 AD. Early Christian missionaries included Saint Columba, who founded a mission at Iona two centuries later. In 1192, the Papal bull Cum universi separated the Scottish church from the Archbishopric of York, creating an independent national church with no higher authority except the Pope.

Establishment and John Knox
The Church of Scotland in its current form traces its origins to the Scottish Reformation of 1560. At that point, many in the then church in Scotland broke with Rome, in a process of Protestant reform led, among others, by John Knox. It reformed its doctrines and government, drawing on the principles of John Calvin which Knox had been exposed to while living in Geneva, Switzerland. An assembly of some nobles, lairds and burgesses, as well as several churchmen, claiming in defiance of the Queen to be a Scottish Parliament, abolished papal jurisdiction and approved the Scots Confession, but did not accept many of the principles laid out in Knox's First Book of Discipline, which argued, among other things, that all of the assets of the old church should pass to the new. The 1560 Reformation Settlement was not ratified by the crown, as Mary I, a Catholic, refused to do so, and the question of church government also remained unresolved. In 1572 the acts of 1560 were finally approved by the young James VI, but the Concordat of Leith also allowed the crown to appoint bishops with the church's approval. John Knox himself had no clear views on the office of bishop, preferring to see them renamed as 'superintendents' which is a translation of the Greek; but in response to the new Concordat a Presbyterian party emerged headed by Andrew Melville, the author of the Second Book of Discipline.

Melville and his supporters enjoyed some temporary successes—most notably in the Golden Act of 1592, which gave parliamentary approval to Presbyterian courts. James VI, who succeeded to the English throne in 1603, believed that presbyterianism was incompatible with monarchy, declaring "No bishop, no king" and by skillful manipulation of both church and state, steadily reintroduced parliamentary and then diocesan episcopacy. By the time he died in 1625, the Church of Scotland had a full panel of bishops and archbishops. General Assemblies met only at times and places approved by the Crown.

"The Restoration"

Charles I inherited a settlement in Scotland based on a balanced compromise between Calvinist doctrine and episcopal practice. Lacking the political judgement of his father, he began to upset this by moving into more dangerous areas. Disapproving of the 'plainness' of the Scottish service he, together with his Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, sought to introduce the kind of liturgical practice in use in England. The centrepiece of this new strategy was the Scottish Prayer Book of 1637, a slightly modified version of the Anglican Book of Common Prayer. Although this was devised by a panel of Scottish bishops, Charles' insistence that it be drawn up in secret and adopted sight-unseen led to widespread discontent. When the Prayer Book was finally introduced at St Giles Cathedral in Edinburgh in mid-1637 it caused an outbreak of rioting, which, starting with Jenny Geddes, spread across Scotland. In early 1638 the National Covenant was signed by large numbers of Scots, protesting at the introduction of the Prayer Book and other liturgical innovations that had not first been tested and approved by free Parliaments and General Assemblies of the Church. In November 1638, the General Assembly in Glasgow, the first to meet for twenty years, not only declared the Prayer Book unlawful, but went on to abolish the office of bishop itself. The Church of Scotland was then established on a Presbyterian basis. Charles' attempt at resistance to these developments led to the outbreak of the Bishops' Wars. In the ensuing civil wars, the Scots Covenanters at one point made common cause with the English parliamentarians—resulting in the Westminster Confession of Faith being agreed by both. This document remains the subordinate standard of the Church of Scotland, but was replaced in England after the Restoration.

Episcopacy was reintroduced to Scotland after the Restoration, the cause of considerable discontent, especially in the south-west of the country, where the Presbyterian tradition was strongest. The modern situation largely dates from 1690, when after the Glorious Revolution the majority of Scottish bishops were non-jurors, that is, they believed they could not swear allegiance to William II (of Scotland, William III of England) and Mary II while James VII lived. To reduce their influence the Scots Parliament guaranteed Presbyterian governance of the church by law, excluding what became the Scottish Episcopal Church. Most of the remaining Covenanters, disagreeing with the Restoration Settlement on various political and theological grounds, most notably because the Settlement did not acknowledge the National Covenant and Solemn League and Covenant, also did not join the Church of Scotland, instead forming the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Scotland in 1690.

Independence of the church

Controversy still surrounded the relationship between the Church of Scotland's independence and the civil law of Scotland. The interference of civil courts with church decisions, particularly over the appointment of ministers, following the Church Patronage (Scotland) Act 1711, which gave landowners, or patrons, the right to appoint ministers to vacant pulpits, would lead to several splits. This began with the secession of 1733 and culminated in the Disruption of 1843, when a large portion of the church broke away to form the Free Church of Scotland. The seceding groups tended to divide and reunite among themselves—leading to a proliferation of Presbyterian denominations in Scotland, as is demonstrated in the timeline, above.

The UK Parliament passed the Church of Scotland Act 1921, finally recognising the full independence of the church in matters spiritual, and as a result of this, and passage of the Church of Scotland (Property and Endowments) Act 1925 (15 & 16 Geo. 5. c. 33), the church was able to unite with the United Free Church of Scotland in 1929. The United Free Church of Scotland was itself the product of the union of the former United Presbyterian Church of Scotland and the majority of the Free Church of Scotland in 1900. The 1929 assembly of church leaders to effect the Union of that year met at Industrial Hall on Annandale Street in north Edinburgh.

Some independent Scottish Presbyterian denominations still remain. These include the Free Church of Scotland—sometimes given the epithet The Wee Frees—(originally formed of those congregations which refused to unite with the United Presbyterian Church in 1900), the United Free Church of Scotland (formed of congregations which refused to unite with the Church of Scotland in 1929), the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland (which broke from the Free Church of Scotland in 1893), the Associated Presbyterian Churches (which emerged as a result of a split in the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland in the 1980s) and the Free Church of Scotland (Continuing) (which emerged from a split in the Free Church of Scotland in 2000). The motto of the Church of Scotland is nec tamen consumebatur (Latin)—"Yet it was not consumed", an allusion to Exodus 3:2 and the Burning Bush.

Recent history
In 2023, the Church of Scotland published a report which detailed its connections to the Atlantic slave trade. It noted that from 1707 to the 1830s, Church of Scotland ministers and elders inherited wealth from familial relatives which were made on West Indian slave plantations and numerous church buildings (including Glasgow Cathedral) contain memorials to and accepted donations from individuals who profited from slavery. The report also noted that Black slaves were used to build Church of Scotland churches in the West Indies and money made from slavery were distributed by the church to Scottish parishes to fund philanthropic efforts which assisted Scotland's poor. It ended by recommending to the General Assembly that "a statement of acknowledgment and apology should be brought to a future General Assembly and a dedicated page about the Church’s connections to the slave trade should be created for its website."

Controversies
In 2019, the Church of Scotland paid £1 million in damages to three siblings who been abused at the Lord and Lady Polwarth children's home.

Theology and practice

The basis of faith for the Church of Scotland is the Word of God, which it views as being "contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament". Its principal subordinate standard is The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), although here liberty of opinion is granted on those matters "which do not enter into the substance of the faith" (Art. 2 and 5). (The 19th century Scottish distinction was between 'evangelicals' and 'moderates'.) There is no official document in which substantial matters and insubstantial ones are clearly demarcated.

The Church of Scotland has no compulsory prayer book, although it does have a hymn book (the 4th edition was published in 2005). Its Book of Common Order contains recommendations for public worship, which are usually followed fairly closely in the case of sacraments and ordinances. Preaching is the central focus of most services. Traditionally, Scots worship centred on the singing of metrical psalms and paraphrases, but for generations these have been supplemented with Christian music of all types. The typical Church of Scotland service lasts about an hour. There is normally no sung or responsive liturgy, but worship is the responsibility of the minister in each parish, and the style of worship can vary and be quite experimental. In recent years, a variety of modern song books have been widely used to appeal more to contemporary trends in music, and elements from alternative liturgies including those of the Iona Community are incorporated in some congregations. Although traditionally worship is conducted by the parish minister, participation and leadership by members who are not ministers in services is becoming more frequent, especially in the Highlands and the Borders.

In common with other Reformed denominations, the church recognises two sacraments: Baptism and Holy Communion (the Lord's Supper). The church baptises both believing adults and the children of Christian families. Communion in the Church of Scotland today is open to Christians of whatever denomination, without precondition. If baptised as an infant, one is expected to make the public profession of faith as part of a confirmation ceremony. Communion services are usually taken fairly seriously in the church; traditionally, a congregation held only three or four per year, although practice now greatly varies between congregations. In some congregations, communion is celebrated once a month.

Theologically, the Church of Scotland is Reformed (ultimately in the Calvinist tradition) and is a member of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches.

Ecumenical relations
The Church of Scotland is a member of ACTS (Action of Churches Together in Scotland) and, through its Committee on Ecumenical Relations, works closely with other denominations in Scotland. The present inter-denominational co-operation marks a distinct change from attitudes in certain quarters of the church in the early twentieth century and before, when opposition to Irish Roman Catholic immigration was vocal (see Catholicism in Scotland). The Church of Scotland is a member of the World Council of Churches, the Conference of European Churches, the Community of Protestant Churches in Europe, and the World Communion of Reformed Churches. The Church of Scotland is a member of Churches Together in Britain and Ireland and, through its Presbytery of England, is a member of Churches Together in England. The Church of Scotland continues to foster relationships with other Presbyterian denominations in Scotland even where agreement is difficult. In May 2016 the Church of Scotland ratified the Columba Agreement (approved by the Church of England's General Synod in February 2016), calling for the two churches to work more closely together on matters of common interest. In 2022, the Church of Scotland and the Catholic Bishops Conference of Scotland agreed a declaration of friendship between the Church of Scotland and the Catholic Church.

"God's Invitation"
While the Bible is the basis of faith of the Church of Scotland, and the Westminster Confession of Faith is the subordinate standard, a request was presented to a General Assembly of the Church of Scotland for a statement explaining the historic Christian faith in jargon-free non-theological language. "God's Invitation" was prepared to fulfil that request. The full statement reads: God made the world and all its creatures with men and women made in His image.

By breaking His laws people have broken contact with God, and damaged His good world. This we see and sense in the world and in ourselves.

The Bible tells us the Good News that God still loves us and has shown His love uniquely in His Son, Jesus Christ. He lived among us and died on the cross to save us from our sin. But God raised Him from the dead!

In His love, this living Jesus invites us to turn from our sins and enter by faith into a restored relationship with God Who gives true life before and beyond death.

Then, with the power of the Holy Spirit remaking us like Jesus, we—with all Christians—worship God, enjoy His friendship and are available for Him to use in sharing and showing His love, justice, and peace locally and globally until Jesus returns!

In Jesus' name we gladly share with you God's message for all people—You matter to God! It was approved for use by the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland in May 1992.

Social and political issues
The national church has never shied from involvement in Scottish politics. In 1919, the General Assembly created a Church and Nation Committee, which in 2005 became the Church and Society Council, and in 2019 merged with the World Mission Council to create the Faith Impact Forum. The Church of Scotland is a firm opponent of nuclear weaponry. Supporting devolution, it was one of the parties involved in the Scottish Constitutional Convention, which resulted in the setting up of the Scottish Parliament in 1997. Indeed, from 1999 to 2004 the Parliament met in the church's Assembly Hall in Edinburgh, while its own building was being constructed. The Church of Scotland supports the Scottish Churches Parliamentary Office in Edinburgh, an ecumenical partnership which is staffed and resourced by the Church.

Women's ordination
Since 1968, all ministries and offices in the church have been open to women and men on an equal basis. In 2004, Alison Elliot was chosen to be Moderator of the General Assembly, the first woman in the post and the first non-minister to be chosen since George Buchanan, four centuries before. In May 2007 Sheilagh M. Kesting became the first female minister to be Moderator. There are currently 218 serving female ministers, with 677 male ministers.

Homosexuality
The Church of Scotland allows its clergy to enter into same-sex marriages and civil partnerships. In May 2022, the General Assembly voted in favour of permitting the church's clergy to conduct same-sex marriages.

In May 2009, there was opposition to an attempt to install as minister an openly homosexual man who intended to live with his partner once appointed to his post. In a landmark decision on 23 May 2009 the General Assembly (GA) ratified by 326 to 267 the appointment of Scott Rennie, the church's first out, non-celibate gay minister. Rennie had won the overwhelming support of his prospective church members at Queen's Cross, Aberdeen, but his appointment was in some doubt until extensive debate and this vote by the commissioners to the assembly. The GA later agreed upon a moratorium on the appointment of further non-celibate gay people until after a special commission has reported on the matter. (See: LGBT clergy in Christianity.)

As a result of these developments, a new grouping of congregations within the church was begun "to declare their clear commitment to historic Christian orthodoxy", known as the Fellowship of Confessing Churches. In May 2011, the GA of the Church of Scotland voted to appoint a theological commission with a view to fully investigating the matter, reporting to the General Assembly of 2013. Meanwhile, openly homosexual ministers ordained before 2009 would be allowed to keep their posts without fear of sanction. On 20 May 2013, the GA voted in favour of a proposal that allowed liberal parishes to opt out of the church's policy on homosexuality. Since 2008, 25 out of 808 (3%) ministers had left over the issue. It was reported that seceding congregations had a combined annual income of £1 million.

In 2015, the Church of Scotland's GA voted in favour of recommending that gay ministers be able to enter into same-sex marriages. and allowing pastors to enter in same-sex civil partnerships. On 21 May 2016, the GA voted in favour of the approval for gay and lesbian ministers to enter into same-sex marriages. In 2017, there was a report to be debated at the church's General Assembly in May that proposed "having a church committee research allowing nominated ministers and deacons to carry out the ceremonies, but...to retain the ability for 'contentious refusal' from those opposed to same-sex marriage."

A Theological Forum report calling for the approval of same-sex marriage, and an apology to homosexuals for past mistreatment was approved by the General Assembly on 25 May 2017. In 2018, the church's assembly voted in favour of drafting a new church law to allow same-sex marriages and to give ministers the option of performing same-sex marriages. The church was expected to vote on a final poll in 2021 but, after being considered at a GA in May 2021, a draft plan might still be being considered by commissioners prior to being shared with all presbyteries for their consideration under the Church of Scotland's Barrier Act 1697 and being brought back to a future General Assembly. On 23 May 2022 the GA voted in favour of same-sex marriage with 274 for and 136 against. Clergy will be allowed to conduct the marriages but will not be forced to.

Many church congregations and clergy affirm the full inclusion of transgender and other LGBTI people within the church through Affirmation Scotland.

Israeli–Palestinian conflict
In April 2013, the church published a report entitled "The Inheritance of Abraham: A Report on the 'Promised' Land" which included a discussion of Israeli and Jewish claims to the Land of Israel. The report said "there has been a widespread assumption by many Christians as well as many Jewish people that the Bible supports an essentially Jewish state of Israel. This raises an increasing number of difficulties and current Israeli policies regarding the Palestinians have sharpened this questioning", and that "promises about the Land of Israel were never intended to be taken literally". The church responded to criticism by saying that "The Church has never and is not now denying Israel's right to exist; on the contrary, it is questioning the policies that continue to keep peace a dream in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory. This report is against the injustices levelled against the Palestinian people and how land is shared. It is also a reflection of the use or misuse of scripture to claim divine right to land by any group" and says it must "refute claims that scripture offers any peoples a privileged claim for possession of a particular territory".

The Scottish Council of Jewish Communities sharply criticised the report, describing it as follows: "It reads like an Inquisition-era polemic against Jews and Judaism. It is biased, weak on sources, and contradictory. The picture it paints of both Judaism and Israel is barely even a caricature. The arrogance of telling the Jewish people how to interpret Jewish texts and Jewish theology is breathtaking." The report was also criticised by the Anti-Defamation League and the Israeli envoy to the United Kingdom.

In response to criticism, the church quickly replaced the original version with a modified one, stating that criticism of Israel's policies toward the Palestinians "should not be misunderstood as questioning the right of the State of Israel to exist".

Abortion
The Church of Scotland is somewhat anti-abortion, stating that it should be allowed "only on grounds that the continuance of the pregnancy would involve serious risk to the life or grave injury to the health, whether physical or mental, of the pregnant woman."

Euthanasia
The Church of Scotland also opposes euthanasia: "The General Assembly has consistently stated that: 'the Christian recognises no right to dispose of his own life even although he may regard those who commit or may attempt to commit suicide with compassion and understanding rather than condemnation'. The church has frequently stressed its opposition to various attempts to introduce legislation to permit euthanasia, even under strictly controlled circumstances as incompatible with Christianity." The church is associated with the Care Not Killing organisation in "Promoting more and better palliative care./ Ensuring that existing laws against euthanasia and assisted suicide are not weakened or repealed during the lifetime of the current Parliament./ Influencing the balance of public opinion further against any weakening of the law."

Capital punishment
Historically, the Church of Scotland supported the death penalty; the General Assembly once called for the "vigorous execution" of Thomas Aikenhead, who was found guilty of blasphemy in 1696. Nowadays, the church strongly disapproves of the death penalty: "The Church of Scotland affirms that capital punishment is always and wholly unacceptable and does not provide an answer even to the most heinous of crimes. It commits itself to working with other churches and agencies to advance this understanding, oppose death sentences and executions and promote the cause of abolition of the death penalty worldwide."

Divorce
The Church of Scotland does not consider marriage to be a sacrament, and thus not binding forever, and has no moral objection to the remarriage of divorced persons. The minister who is asked to perform a ceremony for someone who has a prior spouse living may inquire for the purpose of ensuring that the problems which led to the divorce do not recur.

Position in Scottish society
At the time of the 2001 census, the number of respondents who gave their religion as Church of Scotland was 2,146,251 which amounted to 42.4% of the population of Scotland. In 2013, the Church of Scotland had around 995 active ministers, 1,118 congregations, and its official membership at 398,389 comprised about 7.5% of the population of Scotland. Official membership is down some 66.5% from its peak in 1957 of 1.32 million. In the 2011 national census, 32% of Scots identified their religion as "Church of Scotland", more than any other faith group, but falling behind the total of those without religion for the first time. However, by 2013 only 18% of Scots self-identified as Church of Scotland. Though according to the 2014 Scottish Annual Household Survey, 27.8%, or 1.5 million adherents, identified the Church of Scotland as the church of their religion. In 2019, according to the Scottish Household Survey, 20% of Scots self-reported themselves as adherents of the Church of Scotland. The Church of Scotland Guild, the church's historical women's movement and open to men and women since 1997, is still the largest voluntary organisation in Scotland.

According to the 2011 census, among respondents who identified with the church, 96% were white Scots, 3% were other white people, and 1% were from other ethnic groups; this broadly reflects Scotland's demographic make-up.

Although it is the national church, it is not a state church; this and other regards makes it dissimilar to the Church of England (the established church in England). Under its constitution (recognised by the 1921 act of the British Parliament), the church enjoys complete independence from the state in spiritual matters. When in Scotland, the British monarch simply attends church, as opposed to their role in the English Church as Supreme Governor. The monarch's accession oath includes a promise to "maintain and preserve the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government". They are formally represented at the annual General Assembly by a Lord High Commissioner unless they choose to attend in person; the role is purely formal, and the monarch has no right to take part in deliberations.

The church is committed to its 'distinctive call and duty to bring the ordinances of religion to the people in every parish of Scotland through a territorial ministry' (Article 3 of its Articles Declaratory). The church played a leading role in providing universal education in Scotland (the first such provision in the modern world), largely due to its teaching that all should be able to read the Bible. However, it ceased operating its schools, which were transferred to the state, in the latter half of the 19th century.

The Church of Scotland faces many current difficulties. Between 1966 and 2006, the number of members fell from over 1,230,000 to 504,000, reducing further to 446,000 in 2010 380,164 by 2014, 336,000 by 2017, and 325,695 by 2018, representing about 6% of the Scottish population. The Scottish Church Census of 2016 reported that just under 137,000 people worshipped on an average Sunday in a Church of Scotland, approximately 41% of the stated membership. However, according to the 2024 Assembly Trustees Report, only 61,580 were attending an average Sunday worship service in person during 2023.

In 2016 the church faced a £5.7 million deficit amid costly upkeep of many older ecclesiastical buildings. In response the church decided to 'prune to grow', reducing ministry provision plans from 1,234 to 1,000 funded posts (1,075 established FTE posts, of which 75 would be vacant at any one time) supported by a variety of voluntary and part-time ministries. At the same time the number of candidates accepted for full-time ministry has reduced from 24 (2005) to 8 (2009). Since 2014, the number of full-time candidates accepted into training each year has been in the range of 13 to 16. At the 2016 General Assembly the Moderator pointed to issues such as: 25% of charges without a minister; all but two ministers over the age of 30; falling clergy numbers over the coming six years (anticipated that for each newly recruited minister there will be four retirements).

By 2021 membership was continuing to decline year on year, leading to a new plan "without which the church would not survive." The proposal reduced the number of ministry posts by 40%; to 660 of which 60 would be vacant at any one time, and was said to offer the church a chance to thrive. By December 2022 the Church had 270,300 members, a 4.7% decline from 2021, and representing an overall decline of 35% since 2012.

This lack of those in training towards ministry has threatened the viability of the church's theological training colleges. During the 2019 General Assembly, the Ministries Council announced that they were looking to reduce the number of Academic Partners who train current ministry students from five, to either one or two. The five current academic partners are University of Glasgow, University of Edinburgh, University of Aberdeen, University of St Andrews and, most recently, Highland Theological College.

Governance and administration
The Church of Scotland is Presbyterian in polity and Reformed in theology. The most recent articulation of its legal position, the Articles Declaratory (1921), spells out the key concepts.

Courts and assemblies
As a Presbyterian church, the church has no bishops but is rather governed by elders and ministers (collectively called presbyters) sitting in a series of courts. Each congregation is led by a Session. The Sessions in turn are answerable to regional presbyteries (of which the church currently has 14). The supreme body is the annual General Assembly, which meets each May in Edinburgh. Until the mid 1990's, the Church of Scotland also had Synods, representing a layer of governance between Presbyteries and the General Assembly.

National Youth Assembly
The National Youth Assembly, often shortened to NYA, was an annual gathering of young people aged between 17 and 25 years old within the Church of Scotland. It ran from 1994 to 2019 and was run by the Mission and Discipleship Council of the Church, as part of Church of Scotland Youth (CoSY). The NYA discussed different topics every year and determined what they wish to say on these topics through the medium of debate (deliberately akin to that of the General Assembly).

Moderator
Each court is convened by the 'moderator'—at the local level of the Session normally the parish minister who is ex officio member and Moderator of the Session. Congregations where there is no minister, or where the minister is incapacitated, may be moderated by a specially trained elder. Presbyteries and the General Assembly elect a moderator each year. The Moderator of the General Assembly serves for the year as the public representative of the church, but beyond that enjoys no special powers or privileges and is in no sense the leader or official spokesperson of the church. At all levels, moderators may be either elders or ministers. Only Moderators of Sessions are obliged to be trained for the role.

The official residence of the Moderator is Number 2 Rothesay Terrace in Edinburgh.

National General Assembly Bodies
At a national level, the work of the Church of Scotland is chiefly carried out by bodies appointed by the General Assembly, each supported by full-time staff mostly based at the Church of Scotland Offices in Edinburgh. Following a major reform (described as a "Radical Action Plan") agreed at the 2019 General Assembly, the major central bodies are now:
 * Faith Impact Forum (replaced the former Church and Society Council and World Mission Council)
 * Faith Nurture Forum (replacing the former Ministries Council and Mission and Discipleship Council)
 * Social Care Council (based at Charis House, Edinburgh)

The Church of Scotland's Social Care Council (known as CrossReach) is the largest provider of social care in Scotland today, running projects for various disadvantaged and vulnerable groups: including care for the elderly; help with alcoholism, drug, and mental health problems; and assistance for the homeless.

A new body, the Assembly Trustees, was also created in 2019, to be the Charity Trustees of the Church and to head the Church's governance structure. There are 12 General Assembly appointed trustees, plus the Convener of the Assembly Business Committee and the Chair of the General Trustees (the body responsible for property).

The national church has never shied from involvement in Scottish politics. In 1919, the General Assembly created a Church and Nation Committee, which in 2005 became the Church and Society Council, and in 2019 merged with the World Mission Council to create the Faith Impact Forum. The Church of Scotland was (and is) a firm opponent of nuclear weaponry. Supporting devolution, it was one of the parties involved in the Scottish Constitutional Convention, which resulted in the setting up of the Scottish Parliament in 1997. Indeed, from 1999 to 2004 the Parliament met in the church's Assembly Hall in Edinburgh, while its own building was being constructed. The Church of Scotland actively supports the work of the Scottish Churches Parliamentary Office in Edinburgh.

Other church agencies include:
 * Assembly Arrangements Committee
 * Committee on Chaplains to HM Forces
 * Church of Scotland Guild
 * Committee on Church Art and Architecture (part of the Mission and Discipleship Council)
 * Ecumenical Relations Committee
 * Stewardship and Finance Department
 * General Trustees (a Statutory Corporation, created by the Church of Scotland (Property And Endowments) Act 1925 of the UK Parliament and responsible for church buildings and stipend endowments . The legal owners of most local church buildings)
 * Legal Questions Committee
 * Panel on Review and Reform
 * Department of the General Assembly
 * Safeguarding Service (protection of children and vulnerable adults)

Church offices
The Church of Scotland Offices are located at 121 George Street, Edinburgh. These imposing buildings—popularly known in church circles as "one-two-one"—were designed in a Scandinavian-influenced style by the architect Sydney Mitchell and built in 1909–1911 for the United Free Church of Scotland. Following the union of the churches in 1929 a matching extension was built in the 1930s.

The offices of the Moderator, Principal Clerk, General Treasurer, Law Department and all the Church councils are located at 121 George Street, with the exception of the Social Care Council (CrossReach). The Principal Clerk to the General Assembly is Fiona Smith (the first woman to hold the post full-time), who succeeded George Whyte in 2022.

Publications
The following publications are useful sources of information about the Church of Scotland.
 * Life and Work – the monthly magazine of the Church of Scotland.
 * Church of Scotland Yearbook (known as "the red book") – published annually with statistical data on every parish and contact information for every minister.
 * Reports to the General Assembly (known as "the blue book") – published annually with reports on the work of the church's departments.
 * The Constitution and Laws of the Church of Scotland (known as "the green book") edited by James L. Weatherhead, published 1997 by the Church of Scotland, ISBN 0-86153-246-5 and which has now replaced the venerable
 * Practice and Procedure in The Church of Scotland edited by James Taylor Cox, published by The Committee on General Administration, The Church of Scotland, 1976 (sixth edition) ISBN 0-7152-0326-6
 * Fasti Ecclesiae Scoticanae – published irregularly since 1866, contains biographies of ministers.
 * The First and Second Books of Discipline of 1560 and 1578.
 * The Book of Common Order latest version of 1994.

Bodies to which the Church of Scotland is affiliated

 * Action of Churches Together in Scotland
 * Churches Together in Britain and Ireland
 * Conference of European Churches
 * Community of Protestant Churches in Europe (Leuenberg Church Fellowship)
 * World Council of Churches
 * World Communion of Reformed Churches

title: Church of Scotland


text:
Talk:Eileen Barker

Untitled
I believe that there could be different wording used instead of the word 'unsuccessful' twice when talking about her political career. It also appears that the 16th citation no longer is an existing link. Otherwise this appears to be a very well written page. Thank you for contributing your information! Rosburn (talk) 05:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Rosburn.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
Hello,

it would be helpful to the reader to know more about her approach and conclusions, as she describes it in Barker, Eileen "The Scientific Study of Religion? You Must Be Joking!" Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 34 (1995), pp. 287-310. There she describes the position of the sociologist, the concepts of scientific research of these movements, the position of a scientist within a field of differing viewpoints which are not or much less scientifically based, how she made this researched information available to the public etc. I think this artcle should present more on her viewpoint, and then can have "controversial viewpoints of other personalities". Then I suggest to make a difference between a "controversial" person and a specific opinion or scientific interpretation which can be controversely dicussed. English is not my first language and I do not know enough about your editing procedure due to time constraints, but I like to read wikipedia and appreciate your work! Thank you so much for your efforts!

Kind regards!

Thomas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.57.54.87 (talk) 09:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Sociologist shows "Moonies" are actually fairly normal, August 12, 1998

Reviewer: edpoor@mailexcite.com from Long Island, NY

Sociologist Eileen Barker spent considerable time "on campus" watching both old-time and potential Unificationists. She dispels the myth that the Unification Church uses some extraordinary set of techniques to trick or coerce people into joining (her statistics show that only a tiny percentage keep up their contact even after spending a whole weekend at a workshop). Although Barker never warms to the church (no accounting for taste ), she presents a detailed and remarkably fair viewpoint, which may dismay both those who have preconceived notions about the church and those who think it should not be criticized at all.

Raw material for the article:

One good indicator of the non-existence of mind-control techniques is the ineffectiveness of NRM recruitment programs. "Eileen Barker documents that out of 1000 people persuaded by the Moonies [Unification Church] to attend one of their overnight programs in 1979, 90% had no further involvement. Only 8% joined for more than one week..." 4

Another indicator of the non-existence of mind control is the high turnover rate of members. Eileen Barker mentions that there is a 50% attrition rate during the members' first two years.

A personal encounter
I met Ms. Barker at an AAR conference in November. When I gushingly praised her Making of a Moonie, she acted suspicious, immediately asking What do you want and complained that I was "love-bombing" her. J. Gordon Melton, sitting next to her, made no comment.

She interviewed me briefly and took my address. Uncle Ed 14:37, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
 * What is she doing at the AAR. I thought she was British. Why don't you write the article The Making of a Moonie: Choice or Brainwashing? ? Seems like a notable sociology book. I only send her a video over the post upon her request. I never met her. Andries 22:10, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I guess she likes traveling to the States. By the way, how about merging her book and bio? --Uncle Ed (talk) 16:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Everybody who writes about cults and NRMs is controversial
Where is the indication or proof that Eileen Barker is more than average controversial compared to other people who write about cults and NRMs? Andries 21:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Indeed, she is not "more controversial". But please see the recent discussion at Margaret Singer. Tanaats 21:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I did. I placed a citation tag for the word controversial there too. Andries 21:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Cool! Tanaats 21:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, she is even more than average controversial :)
 * A good source would be the recent paper by Prof. Alexander Dvorkin, which you can read here: . It's also available as a WORD file somewhere, can't find where :( She and Melton are really the worst of this kind, i.e. the ones that really do accept favours. --Tilman 21:58, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Dvorkin really hits the nail on the head. Tanaats 22:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

How does the following article support the statement that she is controversial? I do not see it. Andries 09:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 *

 * I'm speaking of another paper, presented at the London FAIR conference. It doesn't seem to be on the web, or it is not indexed by Google.
 * The DCI paper is also interesting, of course - it shows that she (and James Richardson) will testify about anything, when asked to. --Tilman 13:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * But was that paper published in a reputable source? If so where? Andries 13:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't know.
 * If we need only a source that she is controversial, we could use the articles about losing the INFORM funding, and the criticism by Sackville. I thought I had posted the source list here ?????? It was originally posted by Monica Pignotti to the usenet. While the usenet isn't a source itself, the sources mentioned are. --Tilman 13:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I do believe reputable sources state that she was attacked by Tom Sackville, but that should be stated as such, without free interpretations of sources. Andries 13:55, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I found it: . It is identical to "Cults in our midst", pp. 217 - 218, notes on p. 352. I could scan / photograph the pages if needed.
 * If I understand you correctly - you think that the word "controversial" is OR, unless a specific source uses that word? --Tilman 14:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Tilman, yes, if sources for example state (preferably mulitiple sources) "the controversial sociologist Eileen Barker", or "Eileen Barker who, as so often, drew heavy criticism"  then I support including the word controversial in the lead. For a comparison, the word controversial in the lead of the article Sathya Sai Baba is sourced. I do not think that free interpretations  of sources (which I made myself too in the past) are okay.  Andries 14:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, this subject is on my list of self-admitted Conflict of interests. Andries 14:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh heh. Now see what I'm just doing :-) --Tilman 14:43, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Dvorkin + Singer
I'll put back the segment with Dvorkin. BabyDweezil claims that this isn't criticism at all. (Funny, because for me, it looks that Dvorkin is saying in a very polite way that she is seriously wrong). BabyDweezil didn't modify the text, or put it in the non-criticism section - so this is clearly an attempt to simply remove something.

I'll revert the change that shortened the "cult in our midst" segment. First, per WP:NPOV, it is important to tell Barkers side of the story - even Singer/Lalich did so, in fairness, and so should we (although I can imagine that he excuse is not very credible). Second, it is important that the words "procult apologist" are mentioned: in the past, different people claimed that all sort of critics of cult apologists didn't use such words. --Tilman 20:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh heh, I see it has already been done. As usual, I am of course willing to compromise with the style to make it more NPOV if other editors think so. But please, be constructive, not destructive. --Tilman 20:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The statement from Dvorkin can hardly be considered serious "criticism", and its inclusion is just an attempt to throw anything that sounds vaguely negative into the article. In any case, the Dvorkin quote isnt a reliable source. The Singer description of Barker's explanation of her funding is third hand and not acceptable as an account of Barker's explanation. find a reliable source where Barker explains her rationale for accepting funding. BabyDweezil 21:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Why is Dvorkin not a reliable source? It was published in Update/Spirituality in East and West. And why is a third hand account of Barker's response not acceptable if properly attributed? Andries 21:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Andries--Can you say what that publication is? In any case, the quote hardly amount to "criticism" of Barker, just a vague comment on a statement she made. And Singer's account of Barker is third hand, and she cites no source in what is an inflammatory ad homenein attack on Barker, likening her to a Nazi scientist! BabyDweezil 21:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * "Spirituality in East and West nr. 11 1998". I think this is the successor of Update magazine that was described a scholarly magazine by David G. Bromley. Andries 21:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Dvorkin is Professor, and if I remember correctly, he has two PhDs. Spirituality in East and West is a reliable source, it is a respected magazine from the Danish Dialog Center.

 * The Barker funding excuse is also mentioned by a reliable source, Singers book. She gives the source: Religious News Service, 10.7.1989. --Tilman 21:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

BD, Instead of just deleting what you don't like - why not do some research and add more positive information about her? --Tilman 21:39, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

How in the world is this "criticism?"
Dvorkin says ""an unusual response from persons claiming to be experts in the field of NRMs." I'm sorry, to include such an off the cuff opinion (by a guy who serves as a propaganda minister for the Russian Orthodox Church and has been cited as fomenting religious unrest in Russia by human rights groups) as constituting "criticism" worthy of an encyclopedia entry is just too much of a stretch. If you guys just want to bash Barker, come up with some reliable serious discussions of her work. BabyDweezil 21:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * BabyDweezil, you are using inflammatory language here. Plus, the guy who you claimed "serves as a propaganda minister" was sued with similar arguments as yours, and won in court. --Tilman 22:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Please stick to the topic and explain how the Dvorkin quote can be considered "criticism" worthy of an encyclopedia article. BabyDweezil 22:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The remark "an unusual response from persons claiming to be experts in the field of NRMs" clearly is criticism. It is also worthy of an encyclopedia article because Dvorkin used very careful words. The word "unusual" is clearly an euphemism. --Tilman 22:59, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The fact that you have to offer such an extensive interpretation of his words and explain that he is using "euphemisms" proves my point that this is not encylopedia-worthy "criticism". BabyDweezil 23:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * So, how should the "criticism" look like to get the "BabyDweezil seal of approval"? --Tilman 23:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Criticism in this context would doing a serious analysis and consideration of the viewpoint of a fellow scholar (even though Dvorkin does not have a scholarly record) and if you disagree, you discuss why those views fall short. The Dvorkin quote does none of that, its somewhere in between a sound bite ("an unusual response") and an Ad hominem attack (calling scholars "persons claiming to be experts"). Then it would get not only my seal of approval, but more importantly, that of the academic community as a whole. BabyDweezil 23:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * This is Wikipedia, it doesn't do own research. It quotes facts, research and statements from reliable sources. A source doesn't get "unreliable" just because it expresses criticism. --Tilman 06:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Tilman, this snippet from Dvorkin is NOT criticism, it a half sentence personal attack on a scholar. OPen an RfC if you want to put it in. BabyDweezil 15:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * So, you invest 10 seconds to delete something relevant, from a reliable academic source, but that you don't like, and expect others to invest an hour, maybe even more to "beg" you to put it back in? That isn't the way it works. --Tilman 18:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Actually the way it works is that editors who put in quotes such as the Dvorkin one give a sensible explanation as to why its relevant, notable, important, reliably sourced, etc. (I spend a good deal of time tracking and verifying sources here) Focusing on that might be more fruitful than your incessant personal attacks on me. BabyDweezil 18:35, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Criticizing your modus operandi here is not a personal attack.

 * If you spent time on verifying the sources, then you know that the Dvorkin statement is well sourced, and that Dvorkin is not just an expert, but an academic expert. --Tilman 20:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I reverted it back in. It has been in since July 2006 with no protest; only recently, it was mentioned (by Andries) that the text didn't properly characterize the content of the source given, so I corrected it with a more verbatim description. --Tilman 08:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The fact that it was there since July 2006 is hardly a justification for it being correct. George Bush has been in the White House since January 2001, but obviously thats a mistake :) But seriously, folks. The "quote" by the fringe church activist (and bigot) Dvorkin is a non-scholarly personal attack on a scholar, not "criticism." Find something by her colleagues that is an actual criticism of her work, not just some cheap propaganda by a hostile "activist." BabyDweezil 13:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It doesn't get non-scholarly just because you call Professor Dvorkin a "bigot", which is inflammatory, "alarmist", and an insult. The truth is that Professor Dvorkin, as a scholar himself, has phrased his criticism in a very moderate language, letting the reader decide. Eileen Barker has claimed that one can be a member of multiple cults at the same time. Even CESNUR calls this a "legal fiction", though failing to mention the "theory" of Barker and Richardson. Dvorkin could have said "she's nuts", "she's lying", or "bullshit". Instead, he chose to call this "unusual".

 * The fact that it was there since July 2006 shows that for 7 months, nobody thought that this statement would be problematic. Andries noted that the text "that she is controversial" wasn't matched by the source, so I corrected this by removing any interpretation and sticking to the actual "polite, careful" language. --Tilman 17:06, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It was accepted by the court, so Dvorkin's criticism is really of the court. Dvorkin calling someone else's testimony "unusual" does not amount to notable "criticism" of a scholar. Find a source where Dvorkin or anyone else examines Barker's views and subjects them to criticism, not a single word ("unusual") orinted in a Church journal commenting on testimony in a court case. And again the "its been here since July 2006" explanation really shows nothing, so there's no need to keep stating it. There is no statute of limitations for editing inaccurate material on Wikipedia.

 * Also, could you direct me to Dvorkin's scholarly record? That would clear up the discussion of whether he actually is a scholar. I can't find anything, other than that he is an anti-NRM propagandist for the Orthodox Church. BabyDweezil 17:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Your "argument" is just saying that my argument is nothing. This is beginning to sound like the Monty Python argument clinic. Its also not you who are making the rules ("not a single word ("unusual") orinted in a Church journal commenting on testimony in a court case"). It has already been stated elsewhere that this "church journal" is a reputable source.

 * The cult apologist link provided do mention publications by him. --Tilman 17:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * We need a source to prove that Professor Dvorkin is a scholar??? Tanaats 21:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Be that as it may, I will repeat my own mantra which is that "No matter how many times you repeat the "scholar" mantra it won't work." Tanaats 21:03, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, I am asking for a source showing that he is a "Professor Dvorkin" and a scholar. The website of the university where he is a professor? A bibliography of his scholarly articles? "Professors" generally have these things readily available, and it wouldnt be the first time inaccurate academic standing or other misinformation appeared on Wikipedia. Dvorkin already has had his credibilty questioned by a Moscow attorney and has been cited by a human rights group for raising the level of religious intolerance in Russia. Can't be too careful these days! BabyDweezil 21:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * As you might know, this "attorney" was the opposing attorney in the court case. HRWF is an obscure organisation. Finally, enter Professor Dvorkin in a search engine. --Tilman 22:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I have searched him. Most results indicate he is an anti-cult activist in Russia, in each reference he seems to be listed as affiliated with a different organization, all of them related to the Orthodox Church. Nothing indicating the university where he is a professor or a bibliography of his scholarly articles. searching "Professor Dvorkin" just turns up blogs and the like, no reliable sources indicating where he is a professor. Am I missing something? BabyDweezil 22:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * So you're setting up new conditions for your private rules ("may not be affiliated with the Orthodox Church" - and you're suggesting that the guy is a fake. --Tilman 22:43, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Tilman, these are not my "private rules," providing corroboration and documentation for claims is a concept that dates back a few thousands years, and is also in widespread use on Wikipedia. If putting "may not be affiliated with the Orthodox Church" is supposed to be a quote from me, a look above shows I clearly didn't say that, so please read other editors comments carefully before attributing quotes to them. In any case, this could be easily cleared up if someone could supply a reliable source indicating the university where Dvorkin is a professor and/or a bibliography of his scholarly articles. Thanks again. BabyDweezil 23:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Ban

 * See multiple warnings and finally text ban by administrator on BabyDweezil's talk page. User in question has been banned from removing material from article mainpages, unless consensus is first achieved on talk page for said activity.  The issue of inappropriate commentary in edit summaries was also brought into question.  Smee 19:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

 * Smee, the Talk Page is for discussion about improving the article, not for incessant denigrations and snide comments about users you disagree with. Your posting of the same comment on multiple pages is creepy stalking behavior. Also, please refer to WP:NPA for further guidance on relating to fellow editors. BabyDweezil 19:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * This is in no way a personal attack. I am merely informing others of the situation at hand, in very plain and factual language.  Smee 20:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC).
 * BD, the fact that an administrator feels herself pushed to such an action, after you have ignored several warnings from her about your edit warring, is indeed relevant for the Talk page on all of the articles that you edit on. Since your multiple bad edits have negatively affected all such articles, other editors deserve to be aware of what is going on.  Tanaats 20:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

 * alright, I'm not going to ask you again--if you continue to discuss me on Talk Pages, including lies about me "ignoring several warnings", I will have to file the standard complaints about you, which I usually hesitate to do.BabyDweezil 20:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You must do what you must do. If I am advised that I am acting inappropriately in any way then I shall be happy to correct my behavior. Tanaats 21:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Unbalanced
For a respected scholar as Barker, this article is unbalanced, as the criticism section is as large as the rest of the text. The article needs to present other material about Barker, such as her work at INFORM and more about her views. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just for the record - I don't mind this at all. I always appreciate when the reader can get both sides of a controversy. --Tilman 06:57, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have been working on adding more positive and neutral info to the article. I will go ahead and take off the unbalanced tag. Steve Dufour 16:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Eileen Barker. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071014065725/http://www.fathom.com/feature/121938/ to http://www.fathom.com/feature/121938/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:40, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eileen Barker


text:
Space rock

Space rock is a music genre characterized by loose and lengthy song structures centered on instrumental textures that typically produce a hypnotic, otherworldly sound. It may feature distorted and reverberation-laden guitars, minimal drumming, languid vocals, synthesizers, and lyrical themes of outer space and science fiction.

The genre emerged in late 1960s psychedelia and progressive rock bands such as Pink Floyd, Hawkwind, and Gong who explored a "cosmic" sound. Similar sounds were pursued in the early 1970s' West German kosmische Musik ("cosmic music") scene. Later, the style was taken up in the mid-1980s by Spacemen 3, whose "drone-heavy" sound was avowedly inspired by and intended to accommodate drug use. By the 1990s, space rock developed into shoegaze, stoner rock and post-rock with bands such as the Verve, Flying Saucer Attack, and Orange Goblin.

Origins: 1950s-1960s
Humanity's entry into outer space provided ample subject matter for rock and roll and R&B songs from the mid-1950s through the early 1960s. It also inspired new sounds and sound effects to be used in the music itself. A prominent early example of space rock is the 1959 concept album I Hear a New World by British producer and songwriter Joe Meek. The album was inspired by the space race and concerned human's first close encounter with alien life forms. Meek then went on to have a UK and US No 1 success in 1961 with "Telstar", named after the newly launched communications satellite and thus intended to commemorate the new space age. Its main instrument was a clavioline, an electronic forerunner of the synthesizers.

The Beatles' song "Flying" (1967), originally titled "Aerial Tour Instrumental", was a psychedelic instrumental about the sensation of flying, whether in a craft or in your own head space. Jimi Hendrix is also an early innovator of the genre, with such tracks as "Third Stone from the Sun", "1983... (A Merman I Should Turn to Be)" and "The Stars That Play with Laughing Sam's Dice".

Pink Floyd's early albums contain pioneering examples of space rock: "Astronomy Domine", "Pow R. Toc H." and "Interstellar Overdrive" from their 1967 debut album The Piper at the Gates of Dawn are examples. Their second album A Saucerful of Secrets contained further examples: "Let There Be More Light" and "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun" with explicit science fiction themes, and their third, More (1969) had "Cirrus Minor".

Peak: 1970s-1980s
In the early 1970s, West Germany's kosmische Musik ("cosmic music") scene developed among artists who explored "spacy", ambient instrumental soundscapes. The term is frequently used as a synonym of krautrock, but may also be used as a German analogue to the English term "space rock". These artists often explored electronic music, synthesizers, and themes related to space or otherworldliness. Examples included artists like Ash Ra Tempel, Tangerine Dream, Popol Vuh, and Klaus Schulze.

In early 1971, Pink Floyd began writing the song that would become known as "Echoes", from the 1971 album Meddle. The song was performed from April until September 1971, with an alternative set of lyrics, written about two planets meeting in space.

A major album in the history of space rock was Hawkwind's Space Ritual (1973), a two-disc live album advertised as "88 minutes of brain-damage" documenting Hawkwind's 1972 tour that included a liquid light show and lasers, nude dancers (notably the earth-mother figure Stacia), wild costumes and psychedelic imagery. This hard-edged concert experience attracted a motley but dedicated collection of psychedelic drug users, science-fiction fans and motorcycle riders. The science fiction author Michael Moorcock collaborated with Hawkwind on many occasions and wrote the lyrics for many of the spoken-word sections on Space Ritual. In Europe, Hungarian band Omega was the biggest space rock band with albums Time Robber (1976), Skyrover (1978), and Gammapolis (1979). Other European bands include the progressive rock groups Eloy and Nektar. Nektar, who were known for having a rhythmic liquid/slide light show at their concerts, released their album Journey to the Centre of the Eye in 1971.

From 1980s to 1990s, Magic Mushroom Band and Ozric Tentacles released space rock albums.

1990s revival

The 1990s space rock revival extended from shoegaze, dream pop and related indie genres, with the explosion of bands such as Spacemen 3, Spiritualized, Mercury Rev, Swervedriver, Slowdive, the Verve, My Bloody Valentine, Lush, the Boo Radleys, Flying Saucer Attack, Ride, the Flaming Lips, Orange Goblin, Magic Mushroom Band, and Ozric Tentacles.

In the mid-1990s, a number of bands built on the space rock styles of Hawkwind and Gong appeared in America. Some of these bands were signed to Cleopatra Records, which then proceeded to release numerous space rock compilations. Starting in 1997, Daevid Allen of Gong, along with members of Hawkwind, Clearlight, and Blue Oyster Cult, started to perform with Spirits Burning, a studio project created to celebrate space rock.

The Strange Daze festivals from 1997 to 2001 showcased the American space rock scene in three-day outdoor festivals. A Michigan-based space rock scene included Burnt Hair Records, Darla Records, and bands such as Windy & Carl, Mahogany, Sweet Trip, Füxa and Auburn Lull. This was a modern movement of the traditional "space rock" sound and was pinned Detroit Space Rock.

21st century
In 2005, Tom DeLonge formed the rock supergroup Angels & Airwaves, who are known for having space rock influences in both its music and lyrics, in addition to having space-themed imagery and artwork.

In 2006 the British rock band Muse released the song "Knights of Cydonia" which is heavily inspired by the song "Telstar" from the Tornados a band that frontman Matt Bellamy's father was a member of.

In 2009 an off-duty NASA worker from the shuttle program synchronised footage of a Discovery launch with the Flowers of Hell's "Sympathy for Vengeance" in an online video which became popular amongst staff at the Kennedy Space Center.

In 2018, British rock band Arctic Monkeys released their sixth studio album, Tranquility Base Hotel & Casino, based on frontman Alex Turner's concept of a luxury resort on the moon for rockstars. The album centres around topics of interstellar travel, consumerism, science fiction and technology, and features several characters such as an unnamed retired rockstar who serves as the narrator for several tracks, 'Mark', the titular hotel's receptionist, and the fictional 'Martini Police' mentioned in the track 'Star Treatment'.

In 2021, Coldplay released the single "Coloratura", a song that pays homage to space rock and has been compared to the works of Pink Floyd, drawing particular comparisons to The Dark Side of the Moon and Shine on You Crazy Diamond.

title: Space rock


text:
Talk:Frankfurt

Frankfurt "at the" Main
User:Kgfleischmann undid an edit of mine, stating that "Frankfurt at the Main" is supposed to be a literal translation of Frankfurt am Main.

As noted in my edit summary, I don't speak German. I do, however, consider that "Frankfurt at the Main" is an obviously defective English translation, and is not correct even as a 'literal' translation. Places are on rivers, not at them. London is not at the Thames; Cairo is not at the Nile. Again, as a non-speaker of German, I verified that the preposition 'am' can be translated to "on the". Other translations proposed by the software were "by the" and "near the", and if somebody who is proficient in both German and English would prefer one of these, I won't object. However, I do object to using "at the", as it's just not good English. For now, I have changed it to Frankfurt on the Main, which is my best attempt at a literal translation of Frankfurt am Main.

Best wishes, ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:25, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, you do not speak German. But you possibly Know, that translations are always interpretations. So, If there were any need to translate the city's name, your interpretation were possibly correct. But there is no need, unless you come up with a proof of the frequent use of "Frankfurt on Main" in the English language, What was done here, was to translate the phrase word by word. Possibly a bad idea, and we should delete the full phrase.--Kgfleischmann (talk) 19:20, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The point is, that the translation was wrong, and now it isn't. Personally, I don't much care whether we have an English translation or not, but if we do have one it should be correct :-) --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 20:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, I see you do not understand what was the purpose of that translation. --Kgfleischmann (talk) 03:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I have often seen Frankfurt on Main, though Frankfurt on the Oder seems more frequent for that city. As any English-speaker knows, "Frankfurt at the Main" is wholly unidiomatic, and just wrong, even as a literal translation. Johnbod (talk) 12:53, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't "upon Main" be the idiomatic translation? --2001:A61:20C1:1401:87C:D07D:D43:6A5C (talk) 14:02, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, as in  Upton-upon-Severn, Newcastle upon Tyne, Kingston upon Hull, and  Kingston upon Thames. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * No, it's not idiomatic, because nobody ever uses it, unlike Frankfurt on Main! Forms like Burton on Trent, Sunbury on Thames etc etc are actually far more common in English, surely. Johnbod (talk) 14:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Those English place name examples, both of the 'on' and 'upon' variety, are irrelevant. The question is, which form is most used by Anglophone writers in the real world? That is, what do the sources say?
 * A Google search for "Frankfurt upon Main" (in quotes) yields 1,910 results. A search for "Frankfurt on Main" yields 278,000 results. And, for the record "Frankfurt on the Main" gives 211,000, while "Frankfurt at the Main" gives 44,600, the vast majority of which are either mirrors of the WP article of a few weeks ago, or on German-registered sites displaying the same lack of English proficiency as discussed above.
 * Based on Google search results alone, there is not much in it between Frankfurt on Main and Frankfurt on the Main, so I am happy to support the use of either. I will however object to any other variant proposed unless significant sources are cited. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Since "am" = "an dem" – that is, it is a contraction which includes a definite article – I suggest that "on the" is the appropriate translation. It would also be a little clearer to make it "Frankfurt on the Main [River]". Vzeebjtf (talk) 16:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Suggest all you like, pal, but "the appropriate translation" is THE ONE(S) ENGLISH-SPEAKERS ACTUALLY USE, not the ones Germans or pedants think we ought to. Johnbod (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Foot-stamping, condescension, and name-calling are not appropriate behaviors on Wikipedia. Vzeebjtf (talk) 21:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Why do you think "literal translation" means "idiomatic translation"? Vzeebjtf (talk) 21:52, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Better. Vzeebjtf (talk) 21:07, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Frankfurt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719085823/http://www.staedtestatistik.de/fileadmin/urban-audit/pdf/EU_stateofcities_2007.pdf to http://www.staedtestatistik.de/fileadmin/urban-audit/pdf/EU_stateofcities_2007.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110101073333/http://bundesbank.de/download/hv/frankfurt/bankenplatz_frankfurt.pdf to http://www.bundesbank.de/download/hv/frankfurt/bankenplatz_frankfurt.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719085810/http://www.stadtgeschichte-ffm.de/service/chronik/chronik_5_2_e.html to http://www.stadtgeschichte-ffm.de/service/chronik/chronik_5_2_e.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Frankfurt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718231934/http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2007/05/PD07__183__12521,templateId=renderPrint.psml to http://www.destatis.de/jetspeed/portal/cms/Sites/destatis/Internet/DE/Presse/pm/2007/05/PD07__183__12521,templateId=renderPrint.psml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Frankfurt neutrality?
I've put a Cn template on the claim that Frankfurt stayed neutral in the Austro-Prussian War. Actually, Frankfurt is the last in the list of the twelve allies to Austria given in Austro-Prussian_War. The German sister article also claims Frankfurt actively participated on the Austrian side. Both may be wrong; but, if so, there should be some source for this (and in that case the articles about the Austro-Prussian War in several wikipedias should be corrected). My bet would be that instead the fault lies here, however.

The neutrality claim was added here. JoergenB (talk) 20:17, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Climate information changed to a single year of data
The climate data has been changed to include less than 2 years of data. The data set is from 2019 onwards. This is an insufficient amount of data for representing Frankfurt's climate. This must be changed back as it is very misleading. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.211.71.150 (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Frankfurt