text:
Talk:The Antichrist (book)

Neutral stand point & Rreinterpretation of Book
I have a feeling that who ever authored this page was trying to guide visitor in interpretation of this Book. What Nietzsche was thinking and when and where and what he meant? Is that the way Wikipedia article should be?

I have read the book translated in my language and I cant find any base of many claims here.

Saying that Jesus was an idiot and then saying that Islam was noble and then that Jesus was crucified on cross while in Islam is well known that Jesus was never killed. Obviously Nietzsche never felt to provide any evidence of his claims turning all meanings upside down excluding any other positive possibility in Jesus example. It is evident that atricle is not cosistent as Nietzsche was not either but here is even worst. If Jesus was right in what he said then no death could affected him. Since God is all powerful and creator of all living things he would not have an issue to restore him or anyone else or even to give pure spiritual form. This is just one example. Claiming that God is dead with no support in evidence but just claim as any fool could do. Then authors of this article say that Nietzsche was referring to Christianity but not Christ. But then God is dead and how come he would make any different statement about Jesus who believed/knew that his father was God who is eternal and everlasting? That is nonsense. He portrayed Jesus as someone who wasted his life for nothing. How that can be unless his disbelief is taken as support. Why authors here misinterpret the book trying to twist what was said in the book? And it should not be like that at all here on Wikipedia to take POV on any topic but on this which is because of nature of people controversial not because of unclear Book. --75.82.177.42 (talk) 06:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Untitled
Yes, I agree the title Antichrist is misleading, but, to whoever wrote the artcle, do you think it could really be appropriate to translate it as "Antichristian"? After all, what is the whole of Nietzsche's philosophy but consists of puns on words and attempts to mislead; example: the best music of the future which has nothing to do the the music of the future (zukunftsmusik)

 * "The Antichristian" suggestion is taken from Kaufman, and I've seen it elsewhere - not sure what my own opinion is on what Nietzsche actually intended. --Tothebarricades 02:29, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

 * "Kaufmann rightly points out that N is trying to be a blasphemous as possible. Therefore "Antichrist" is considered the best rendering. Ethan.Meanor (talk) 20:23, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

The correct translation of the book’s title may be of the utmost importance. Was Nietzsche criticizing the values that were personified by Christ, or was he criticizing the institution of the church, or both? This seems to be at the heart of the book. Hobbes and Spinoza tried to show the pernicious influence of the ecclesiastical church. Was Nietzsche simply in agreement with them or did his critique also extend to the teachings and behavior of Christ? This might be a major distinction.Lestrade (talk) 20:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC)Lestrade

Antichrist -Revaluation Of All Values
I have read the introduction preface of many books on this author and although the book was published as ANTICHRIST by his evil sister, the original title has been revealed to be Re-evaluation of all Values. this gives a whole new twist on the piurpose and intentions of Nietzsche. Nietzsche was a close friend of Pascal, a devoted Christian, actively working his Christian values...this contradicts the title given by his sitster, and past records by his sister who knew Nietzsche to be quite devoted to God and Christ.

--203.59.121.110 15:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Nietzsche and Pascal were not contemporaries. Lestrade 02:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

 * The Antichrist was the first book of a planned project which N had tentatively titled Revaluation of All Values. He himself changed the name to "Antichrist," not his sister; I fail to see what difference you think the title would have made to the content of his thought. As stated above, Nietzsche and Pascal were not contemporaries; N makes a polemical remark about him in §5 of the Antichrist. As to records, nothing presented by the sister is trustworthy. Read his books if you want his opinion. Ethan.Meanor (talk) 20:29, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

 * "The Antichrist was the first book of a planned project which N had tentatively titled Revaluation of All Values" - correct, to some degree. For the longest part, the Titel "Der Wille zur Macht - Versuch einer Umwertung aller Werte" (the will to power - attempt of a revaluation of all virtues/values) keeps coming up in his late notebooks (plans like this appear and disappear frequently in his notes, but this one lingers around quite steadily, even being mentioned in his work "Zur Genealogy der Moral") - and on nearly all occasions its planned as a 4-book-series (!) -envisioned by N to be his magnum opus-, of which the first one was supposed to be "Der Antichrist" (others being, e.g. "Der Immoralist", "Der Misosoph" etc.) - but when he had written down the 62 chapters that would become known as "Der Antichrist", not too long before his mental breakdown, he suddenly started reffering to it as "Die Umwerung aller Werte" (see "Ecce Homo": "Die Umwertung aller werte ist fertig!" (the revaluation is finished) he claims, w/o any of the other parts being written yet), as if it was the whole project. This could mark a change of mind about what he considered essential about the work. - or the early signs of mental decay.
 * - on the other hand: 203.59.121.110 is incorrect in many [more] aspects, obviously confusing many details. F.Nietzsches Sister did publish a book called "Der Wille zur Macht" which she claimed was her brothers plan all along as the announced "Umwertung aller Werte" - many fell for it (including, e.g. Heidegger). She used many notes of Nietzsche, distorting them though, to suit her agenda (she was married to an antisemith, got inspired by that ideology, and even sided with the nazis later on, and their ideology. The work she published was heavily pointed towards that direction, and she could easily be portrayed as a proto-nazi (something that got projected onto F.N. himself, though he often showed disgust for the earlier stages of that [process of] corruption of society, like, e.g. antisemits)). Nietzsche often struggled with his sister and her (mental/ideological) development - just look into ecce homo, when he talks about his mother and sister; even when he talks negatively about "the germans" later on in the same book, it seems, he thinks of all the bad traits he spotted in those two (he claims he himself was polish, other than these women). In his letters though he is almost always very polite even towards those two.
 * furthermore Nietzsche was (/seemed) rather pious as a little child, in his early schoolyears (visiting a very christian school) only, but his teacher foresaw that he would never be a priest, like the little nietzsche believed to be once (his father was - thats what may have inspired that misapprehension) - but he later pointed out that he was atheist all along (there is an interesting early poem of his, where he struggles heavily with pious believe in god... can't recall the name atm.), and again and again points out the benefits of atheism, and why an intelligent deep thinker can't be anything but an atheist; he portrays it as the inevitable final outcome of mental-, intellectial- and even spiritual development (compare: "Morgenröte", 96.), if not hindered.
 * about pascal: Nietzsche often spoke very fondly/respectful of him (and was even making subtle references to pascals thoughts), seeing him as a tremendous mind being corrupted (!) by christianity (maybe even as a brother in mind under less beneficial circumstances?); he often displayed pity for that fact, w/o any irony in that. - they could easily have been friends I guess if they would have been contemporaries. "N makes a polemical remark about him in §5 of the Antichrist" - you seem to miss alot about Nietzsches opinion on Pascal. (e.g.: "Es ist nichts seit Pascal passirt, die deutschen Philosophen kommen gegen ihn nicht in Betracht.", notebooks, fall 1885, 44[2]; "nothing has happened since pascal, german philosophers just don't come into consideration (/don't count) if compared to him.") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.25.17.25 (talk) 11:22, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

A Movement
Henceforth the article has been moved under the heading "Der Antichrist", please make your redirects thereto. This will make it easier for translations of the title to be discussed. This has also been done in relation to The Gay Science, for the sake of order and so on. If any would like to, please also do the same with every other publication by Nietzsche for they are the original titles. I may do it when I have the time.--Glyphonhart 00:20, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I have made a reconsideration: that which was stated above is entirely unnecessary. The English title will make due--for the English wikipedia. Therefore, everything has been restored upto the latest edits hitherto under the original article title of "The Antichrist_(book)".--Glyphonhart 19:49, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Misleading title
Isn't there a way to show that the title Der Antichrist should really be The Antichristian ? Anyone who actually reads the book will see that it is not against Christ, but against Paul. Lestrade 02:09, 24 September 2005 (UTC)Lestrade

 * It has to be obvious to anyone who reads the actual book, not someone else's opinion of it, that Nietzsche did not oppose Christ. He opposed the class of priests in the institutionalized church who maintain power by promoting what Nietzsche considered to be a decadent oposition to life.205.188.117.67 17:22, 8 October 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

 * This is discussed in the second sentence. It is hard to say it "should" be The Antichristian, since Nietzsche almost certainly was aware of the fact that his title had a double meaning in German, but it is (as noted) perhaps more accurate to translate it as such.  However, the standard title in English, for better or worse, has long been The Antichrist. --Delirium 03:13, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
 * This is extremely misleading. The book is not against Christ. Also, it is not about some humanoid, devilish "Antichrist" character. I believe that the Wikipedia article should strongly emphasize that the proper translation of Nietzsche's title is The Antichristian.Lestrade 01:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

 * In a nutshell, the book is against the organized Christian Church and against the Christian priesthood. The book is not against Christ.Lestrade (talk) 18:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)Lestrade

Wikipedia article titles are not venues to take interpretative stances. Our naming conventions clearly convey that the article should be titled according to the most common English name of the subject, which is without question The Antichrist. For the Genealogy of Morality/Genealogy of Morals and Thus Spoke Zarathustra/Thus Spoke Zarathustra the question is a little more complicated, as there seems to have been a movement towards a different title, but I have yet to encounter an edition of this work titled The Antichristian. This is not to stop us from adding an etymological note warning the reader against misinterpretation of the title, if it is backed up by secondary literature. Regards, ɥʞoɹoɯoʞS  18:48, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Back to the Content of the Page
On the issue of the title I would say that in the English language it is normally published as the Antichrist (with a prelude describing its connotations).

 * What bothers me more is:

"In reality there has only been one Christian, and he died on the cross."

About organized Christianity - "I call it the one immortal blemish upon the human race."

"The weak and the botched shall perish: first principle of our charity. And one should help them to it."

"What is more harmful than any vice—Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak—Christianity...."

Are these the best quotations of criticisms of Christianity that people could draw from the book?

 * "have read the introduction preface of many books on this author and although the book was published as ANTICHRIST by his evil sister, the original title has been revealed to be Re-evaluation of all Values. this gives a whole new twist on the piurpose and intentions of Nietzsche. Nietzsche was a close friend of Pascal, a devoted Christian, actively working his Christian values...this contradicts the title given by his sitster, and past records by his sister who knew Nietzsche to be quite devoted to God and Christ.

--203.59.121.110 15:09, 14 August 2005 (UTC)"

Personally, while I do not think Nietzsche was an atheist per-se. I certainly do not think that he, even if he had christian friends, was a fan of the religion (putting it lightly!). Also I don't think calling Nietzsche's sister "evil" is particularly enlightening! LOL (Jezze 01:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC))

This is nuts!

RE: "Nietzsche was a close friend of Pascal"--- This is absurd. Pascal died in 1662; Nietzsche was born in 1844.

RE: "I do not think Nietzsche was an atheist"--- Nietzsche frequently wrote the phrase "we atheists." He proclaimed God dead over and over. He calls religion a lie frequently---though he sometimes admits that it makes people beautiful.

On the Suppressed Passage
The suppressed passage does not appear in the H. L. Mencken translation that is referenced in the "External Links" section, at the bottom of the Wikipedia article. It is also suppressed in Walter Kaufmann's printed translation. However, it can be seen in the Kaufmann translation provided by the "Nietzsche Channel" website. It can also be seen in R. J. Hollingdale's printed translation. Lestrade 13:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

The Nietzsche Archives might not have been surprised by the fabrication of Christ's words on the cross if they recalled that Nietzsche was the author of a complete fable entitled Also Sprach Zarathustra. That parable resembled New Testament forms and showed that Nietzsche was capable of such creative myth construction.Lestrade 20:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)Lestrade

Re-write This
This page is horrible! Immediately after explaining the name of the book, it goes into some person's interpretation of Nietzsche's ideas about Jesus instead of really referring to the book at all. Just because some of those ideas were inspired by the Antichrist does not mean they relate to the book well enough to COMPOSE THE ENTIRETY OF THE ARTICLE.

This person obviously just wanted to present Nietzsche as having liked Jesus. The part about the book's title not referring to the Biblical Antichrist is bullshit; Nietzsche did want to refer to the Antichrist, the book's title is not the Antichristian, get over it. This page is unacceptable.
 * Nowhere in the book is there reference to a personage called "The Antichrist." Instead, there is opposition to the institution of the Christian church and religion. Nietzsche opposed the Christian disparagement of life, as he opposed Schopenhauer's denial of the will to live. Instead of "getting over it," we should open the book itself and read what is in it.Lestrade 14:29, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
 * That is irrelevant to the fact that this page is not actually about the book as much as an interpretation. The beginning sentence of said interpretation doesn't even reference the book!
 * The book was written in the German language. The English translation of Antichrist is ambiguous. It can be either Antichrist or Antichristian. This information is provided in the first sentence. The book itself can't be referenced in that sentence because Nietzsche did not discuss the ambiguity of the English translation of his German title.Lestrade 23:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
 * Again, that was never my main point. Forgetting the title altogether, this page does not adequately describe the book.  Rather, it is an interpretation of Nietzsche's view of Jesus.  Although this was in the book, it is not the whole of the book, and the text itself in the article does not give direct references to the book enough.

149.150.236.118 (talk)I agree with the part about Jesus. He didn't like Jesus! His referring to him as the "only true Christian" was meant as an insult, not a compliment. He was referring to the fact that most people who proclaimed to be Christians, like the young successful prince he mentions, are not really Christians because they pursued the Will to Power. Jesus on the other hand was meek and mild, and didn't protest his death, which is exactly the kind of attitude Nietzsche CONDEMNED. How the hell could you read the Antichrist and come to the conclusion that he liked Jesus? He even says he could not find ONE redeemable quality of the New Testament! Sheesh... — Preceding undated comment added 19:57, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Misunderstanding
Nietzsche wrote this book to oppose people who were against life. He considered the institution of the Christian church to be against life. He also considered people who were weak and sick to be haters of life. Since there are so many of these, they readily became Christians and Christianity became a dominant religion. Nietzsche's concern with people who were against life began when he reacted to the fourth part of Schopenhauer's main work. In this part, Schopenhauer wrote eloquently in praise of people who opposed life, such as ascetics, hermits, saints, and so on. For the rest of Nietzsche's life, he fought against this negative attitude toward life. This book, The Antichrist, was one of his last attempts to express a positive point of view toward life and condemn those who denigrated the world and life in favor of a life after death. So what happens? People look at the title and think that it is some evil book that is in opposition to Jesus Christ. They read through the book and do not comprehend Nietzsche's words, because they have never read Schopenhauer. This is a total, absolute misunderstanding. It is almost the direct opposite to the true meaning of the book. Wikipedia's job is to provide the correct description of the book. This can be done by people who have read and understood the book. It is for the benefit of those who have not taken the time and effort to read Nietzsche's book or any of the books that contributed to Nietzsche's way of thinking. Lestrade 14:34, 22 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
 * I interpreted the book similarly, but unless you have verifiable sources, all this amounts to is original research.Skomorokh 15:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The most verifiable source is a close and repreated reading of the book itself, as well as of books by writers who are mentioned by Nietzsche.Lestrade 15:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
 * So why not use quotes from the book to show that your interpretation is the correct one? What's the problem here?Skomorokh 15:33, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll give it a try and we'll see what happens.Lestrade 00:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

Sympathy
Nietzsche harshly criticized sympathy and compassion. This was in accord with his opposition to Schopenhauer. But, In the end, Schopenhauer seemed to have won. Nietzsche, while walking on a street, witnessed a horse being whipped. He ran to the suffering horse, embraced it, and lapsed into insanity. Fifty years before Nietzsche's breakdown, Schopenhauer had published the following words: "… the essential and principal thing in the animal and man is the same … persons of delicate feelings, on realizing that in a bad mood, in anger, or under the influence of wine, they unnecessarily or excessively, or beyond propriety, ill–treated their dog, horse, or monkey – these people will feel the same remorse, the same dissatisfaction with themselves as is felt when they recall a wrong done to human beings, where it is called the voice of reproving conscience."(Basis of Morality, § 19)Lestrade 00:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

Lestrade's "paraphrase" of § 16, 19 May 2007
Lestrade's "paraphrase" may be correctly worded in the above-referenced revision, but only after attention was brought to the POV of her/his earlier revision. The earlier revision which read "The Christian religion and its morality are based on imaginary fictions" is most definitely POV and is quite different than the later revision which read "Nietzsche claimed that the Christian religion and its morality are based on imaginary fictions." Lestrade changed the wording of the passage and summarized the change thusly: "This a paraphrase of § 16. It is not my POV. It is properly worded." Yes, that may be so in the later revision, but it was not so in her/his earlier revision. The improper wording of the earlier revision may have been an oversight, or it may have not. Lestrade's contributions to this article are noteworthy; however, I would ask Lestrade to remember that s/he does not own this article, and s/he must stick to the rules. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and it is not a forum to advance any agenda. 71.127.228.173 13:52, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I guess that means that I have to insert "Nietzsche claimed," Nietzsche asserted," and "according to Nietzsche" in all of my contributions. I had thought that this was assumed. I have no desire to include any of my personal opinions in the Wiki article. As a matter of fact, I do not have a personal opinion to include.Lestrade 19:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

 * This is interesting: the disputed passage quoted above, "The Christian religion and its morality are based on imaginary fictions," was not added by Lestrade but by 72.73.215.45 at 15:07, 19 May. The same editor made another edit at 15:12. Just 22 minutes later, Lestrade added her/his paraphrase of §16 to make a paragraph comprised of "paraphrases" of §15 and §16 .  Later, another editor removed the paragraph on the grounds of POV.  Lestrade subsequently added "Nietzsche claimed that" to the disputed "paraphrase" of §15, and leaving the paraphrase of §16 intact, restored the paragraph.  In the edit summary s/he wrote: "This a paraphrase of § 16. It is not my POV. It is properly worded."

 * Now why would Lestrade restore the paragraph, mask her/his change of someone else's contribution (the disputed "paraphrase" of §15), and say in her/his edit summary that it was a paraphrase of §16, not her/his POV, and properly worded?

 * It is also interesting to note that the disputed paragraph was the only one in the narrative, as of that edit, which did not contain "Nietzsche claimed," Nietzsche asserted," or "according to Nietzsche" as a preface to a proposition like "The Christian religion and its morality are based on imaginary fictions." Lestrade says s/he "had thought that this was assumed." How convenient! Why was it not assumed in every other paragraph?

 * Lestrade asserts that s/he has no desire to include any of her/his "personal opinions in the Wiki article." Now if we could only be convinced that s/he has no desire to include and of her/his opinions in this Wiki article!  It would also be good to be convinced that Lestrade has no agenda with this Wiki article.

 * Happy trails.72.68.117.141 15:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry to cause all of this trouble. A few times, I forgot to log in to Wikipedia. On such occasions, my IP address was displayed, instead of my Username. In other words, I was User:72.73.215.45 at the time of the May 19 edit. My purpose was to explain that such sentences as "The Christian religion and its morality are based on imaginary fictions" were not my thoughts. Rather, they were Nietzsche's thoughts. I was trying to paraphrase or quote Nietzsche's words in order to provide a summary or epitome of the book. I was not trying to present my own thoughts.Lestrade 15:45, 22 June 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

"Idiot"
Could someone update the page to suggest that Nietzsche's use of the word idiot to describe Jesus was probably a reference to Dostoevsky's Idiot? "The only psychologist from whom I have anything to learn" were Nietzsche's words on Dostoevsky, I think. Just saying "he described Jesus as an idiot" is misleading, though it's true that Nietzsche hates the idea of book summaries, so feel free to keep it as it is out of spite for your readers if you'd really like to. 131.215.169.187 10:52, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Is there any evidence that Nietzsche read Dostoevsky's The Idiot? It is known that he read other works by that author, but not The Idiot. The works by Dostoevsky that Nietzsche owned were Humiliés et offensés (The Insulted and Humiliated), Junger Nachwuchs (The Raw Youth), L'esprit souterrain (Notes from Underground), La Maison des Morts (The House of the Dead), and Les Possédés (The Possessed). He did not own The Idiot, but, of course, he might have read it. Lestrade 12:42, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

Fair use rationale for Image:The Anti-christ.jpg
Image:The Anti-christ.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Image
I wonder why the article is decorated by an image of H.L. Mencken's translation. This translation is the least valuable because it is based on the translations of Anthony Ludovici and Thomas Common. These, in turn, were translations of highly edited German texts that had suppressed several important passages due to the controversial nature of Nietzsche's ideas. In contrast, the more recent translations by R.J. Hollingdale and Walter Kaufmann are based on totally complete texts.Lestrade 15:16, 24 September 2007 (UTC)Lestrade

Fair use rationale for Image:The Anti-christ.jpg
Image:The Anti-christ.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Lacking arguments
The article doesn't actually cite many of Nietzsche's arguments (which are often hidden, by the way). For example, I remember that in first sections he points to arguments against the concept of free will; and also around sect. 25, afair. When he talks about the genesis of values, he also suggests that what we call higher moral system was based on the lower, the "evil", and therefore it is absurd to condemn the former (this is stated more clearly in Twilight of the Idols, c.6, s.8). Next, he notes that the word "truth" was abused, i.e. in that rather rational epoch people generally believed in their reason, considered truth to be what is one and coherent and in contact with the external reality; this is actually very strong argument, because Christians (even if they themselves refuse reason in certain aspects) have to pretend that something is reasonable, to hide various errors, to imitate a coherent reasonable system, when transmitting their ideas (i.e. spreading faith). – When Nietzsche talks of creation (and God's mortal terror of science), he brings the problem of time and eternity to the light. Also, by portreting the history of knowledge as the total opposition of godliness, he points to the fact that in order to know something, it must be simplier than us, less teleological (mere cause-effect), emptier of reason, stupider, more "evil", in general bringing evil people to victory (and gaining power, even spiritual power, over other people). The sole nature of progress (which is demanded by the sole value "truth", worldly truth) is denying both God-the Creator and the Moral God, that is what is said in section 48. And also: that mankind should not seek help from God, because the Deluge (greatly destroying the civilization, the "edifice of knowledge") was his last attempt.

From my side, I could say that also the end of the evil world (the only one where truth, science, is possible) is not approaching, rather the opposite, basing on John 10:16. Also, what is interesting is that Nietzsche's concepts on the teaching of Jesus are much confirmed by the Gospel of Thomas (to which, of canonical Gospels, John's is most similar in the whole way of expression; note that John was the youngest of apostles and it's likely he remembered the sense best). Also, when Nietzsce says that the teaching of personal immortality in its literal sense was especially supported by Paul, we could say that the evidence of this lays in his letters where he confirms many Christians don't believe in eternal life. 77.114.118.110 (talk) 04:44, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the Northern Illinois shooting
I'm not quite sure how I feel about the introduction including the fact that the shooter sent this book to his girlfriend prior to the shooting. Chapman had The Catcher In The Rye on him when he shot Lennon yet there's no mention of that in the introduction to that book. It's not really relevant to the book on a grand scale, I'd call it distasteful but I feel like that in itself would be in bad taste, it just seems ill-placed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quixulous (talk • contribs) 01:43, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of removing it, as I'm not quite sure where else it would fit, but it's certainly out of place in the introduction. Quixulous (talk) 05:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Please have a look ...
at the recently improved article in the German wikipedia de:Der Antichrist. Some of the pictures I have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons might be of use.--Chef aka Pangloss (talk) 13:09, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

The Saint
This book is highly subjective and has is based wholly on Nietzsche's point of view. Therefore, it is not out of place for me to make a personal comment. It seems to me that one of the most important sections is "Paul and the promise of eternal life." Like Islam's afterworld, Christianity's doctrine of resurrection is a strong appeal to every person's will to live. It has a most powerful attraction and cannot be resisted by most people. In selling a religion, this is the best selling point that any salesman could ever offer. Many people will not read Nietzsche's book for fear of divine punishment. Many people who do read it will not understand it at all. It is a kind of detective story in which the brilliant sleuth (Nietzsche) uses intuitive guesswork and ratiocination to understand the mind of St. Paul and to expose his machinations. He wrote The Case of Wagner in the same spirit. However, the book cannot be read as though it provides factual truths. Even though Nietzsche may have intuitively hit upon the truth, there can never be any certain proof to the conclusions of this very unscientific artwork.Lestrade (talk) 19:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)Lestrade

If it was really about Paul, why does he also condemn the Jews? 198.228.199.172 (talk) 13:10, 17 July 2011 (UTC) Collin237

 * Hey Che Guevara, you seemed to imply above that Nietzsche was not against Christ but against Paul, i.e., not against Christ, but against Christians. Take a closer look at Section 39.  He wrote: "...at bottom there was only one Christian, and he died on the cross... In fact, there are no Christians. The “Christian”—he who for two thousand years has passed as a Christian—is simply a psychological self-delusion."  Q.E.D.  Teetotaler 6 January, 2009  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.67.81.197 (talk) 06:03, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I didn't imply anything. I clearly stated my thoughts. Who is Che Guevara?Lestrade (talk) 22:16, 16 January 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

 * Very good, but what does this have to do with the wikipedia page?Ursus Lapideus (talk) 05:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

CALL FOR: Nietzsche scholars
Hello. I am looking to collaborate with a Nietzsche scholar. The focus is specifically geared towards unravelling N.'s last two works: Twilight of The Idols and The Anti-Christ. I have to be extremely judicious (conservative) in my attribution of themes to Nietzsche, so I'd like to have someone more tapped into the peer-reviewed, manistream consensus of standard Nietzsche scholarship to mediate and provide guidance to the claims I am about to make. Either contact me here->

-- Contributions/Skychildandsonofthesun SKY  child   07:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)   Or by electronic mail:   scott (at) infinitelogic (dot) ca  THANKS!

Scientific Method: Someone's Screwing Around
I would like to bring to your attention someone is attempting to essentially argue and debunk Nietzsche in the Scientific Method section, and his so called support is not even anykind of source that is usable. Probably intentional tampering to enspouse his opinion, please edit this section, this isn't a debate forum, it's an online encyclopedia...--24.154.20.241 (talk) 03:14, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Concerned Reader

 * I noticed that too. For now I'm going to remove that section entirely, especially considering its lack of sources.Ursus Lapideus (talk) 02:06, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

The "Scientific Method" section of the article directly relates to § 13 and § 14 of The Antichrist. This should be obvious to any reader.Lestrade (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2010 (UTC)Lestrade

 * The "Scientific Method" section that was there had the sources of §13 and §14 to the book, which was appropriate for those bits of information, however there were no sources to an anecdote it was referencing. The anecdote was about Nietzsche breaking down in the street from seeing a horse being whipped and that he ultimately contradicted himself. The current version is good. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ursus Lapideus (talk • contribs) 18:13, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Criticism?
The book should be heavily and systematically criticised by many authors (making Nietzsche a "holy pagan" in the wordings of Zwingli). Where is that? It should be interspersed in the text here and there. (Personally I cannot wait biking to the library to borrow my copy). Rursus dixit. ( m bork3 !) 08:51, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Changes to "The Antichrist" redirect to lead here
The Antichrist pasted to make sense of below In ictu oculi (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * (cur | prev) 05:32, 14 January 2013 Medeis (talk | contribs) . . (35 bytes) (-6) . . (this is by far the central meaning, see http://stats.grok.se/en/201210/The%20Antichrist%20(book)) (undo)
 * (cur | prev) 05:14, 14 January 2013 Neo-Jay (talk | contribs) . . (41 bytes) (+6) . . (redirected to Antichrist (disambiguation). if The Antichrist (book) is really the primary use, then The Antichrist (book) should be moved to The * Antichrist and a process described by Wikipedia:Requested moves is needed) (undo)
 * (cur | prev) 01:35, 3 October 2012 Medeis (talk | contribs) . . (35 bytes) (-6) . . (the rock songs and album are hardly main topics for this title) (undo)
 * (cur | prev) 00:22, 8 October 2009 78.34.216.176 (talk) . . (41 bytes) (-401) . . (redirect to Antichrist (disambiguation), this is just needlessly confusing otherwise) (undo)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. Clear consensus that the article "the" fails to adequately distinguish from "the Antichrist". The redirect will be restored to its prior target, the dab page. Cúchullain t/ c 22:01, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

--- The Antichrist (book) → The Antichrist – Medeis kept redirecting The Antichrist to The Antichrist (book) (see this and this) and argues that the book is the primary use of the phrase "The Antichrist". If so, then The Antichrist (book) should be moved to The Antichrist. Since he does not place any move request through the process described by Requested moves, I have to place the request for him. Neo-Jay (talk) 07:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I think the primary use of The Antichrist is "the Antichrist", not the book. It should be redirected to Antichrist (disambiguation) or Antichrist, not The Antichrist (book). --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:03, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Neo-Jay. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose While I can't know for sure what everyone else might think I know that if I typed the Antichrist I would not have done so because I was looking for a particular book and I would be surprised if most people would. I also think that The Antichrist should redirect to Antichrist or the dab page instead.--174.93.160.57 (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose clearly should point to Antichrist. -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 00:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Support The opposes are counter to our naming policy, we do not create titles or redirects with a or the unless they are inherent to the subject, which is the case with the book, but not with the figure. Assertions of main usage are irrelevant here since the suggested redirect would be an improper article title. μηδείς (talk) 01:11, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I think there is some confusion here, no one wants to the article antichrist article to the antichrist but simply that the antichrist this article is not what people are likely to look for typing the term in. Simply put the argument is that the redirect should be changed. question.--174.93.160.57 (talk) 03:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Oppose, while we certainly shouldn't move our Antichrist article to "The Antichrist", the non-book Antichrist will still be the primary meaning of the term "the Antichrist". Redirecting to the book would misdirect more readers than it would help. Huon (talk) 01:54, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Agree with Neo-Jay - the redirect The Antichrist should not automatically be inbound to the book but should really redirect to Antichrist (disambiguation). Where does The Devil go? In ictu oculi (talk) 04:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Um, no. A clear reading of the title policy of MOS says that we don't call articles about XXX "The XXX" unless the is already part of the title.  The article about the Antichrist is properly called Antichrist, while the article on the book, but not the person, is properly called The Antichrist, since "The" is part of the title. I am curious what people think users should be typing in when they actually are interested in The Antichrist. I suppose if we assume nobody actually knows the naming conventions here, and that they are entirely counterintuitive, that gets us somewhere. μηδείς (talk) 04:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Does that apply to redirects since no one is suggesting moving "antichrist" "the antichrist" and I don't see the antichrist article redirecting to antichrist means that we are calling that article the antichrist? Also I doubt that many of our average readers are knowledgeable about the rules regarding using the so I doubt that most people looking up this term are looking for the book.--199.91.207.3 (talk) 16:33, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay Medeis|μηδείς let's go from here and change the wording of MOS (where exactly please?) so its clearer, and lets cite this example there. I would think of this book as Der Antichrist actually, but The Antichrist like The Devil is an obvious place where the "The" rule can be tested. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:40, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Oppose -- The target should be a redirect to Antichrist. That article needs (and already has) dablink hatnote to the dab page, where the book is listed.  Basically the situation is as it ought to be and no change is needed.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on The Antichrist (book). 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/20080227173029/http://www.mic.ul.ie/stephen/vol10/Jesus.pdf to http://www.mic.ul.ie/stephen/vol10/Jesus.pdf

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) 07:31, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Translated Editions?
Can someone please double check the books put in the Translated Editions tab? I think it is missing a translation from Hollingdale, which was made available in the 'Penguin Classics' series. Here is the amazon link for it: https://www.amazon.ca/Twilight-Idols-Anti-Christ-Penguin-Classics-ebook/dp/B002RI945U

Below are the ISBN numbers for the book. ISBN 10: 0140445145 ISBN 13: 9780140445145 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.253.203.20 (talk) 03:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Antichrist (book)


text:
SpaghettiOs

SpaghettiOs is an American brand of canned ring-shaped pasta in tomato sauce. It is marketed to parents as "less messy" than regular spaghetti. More than 150 million cans of SpaghettiOs are sold each year. They are sold in tomato sauce and with additions including meatballs, pieces of processed meat resembling hot dog slices, beef-filled ravioli, and calcium-fortified spaghetti.

While SpaghettiOs is a trade name, the equivalent prepared dish made by various manufacturers is available in many countries as 'spaghetti hoops', 'spaghetti loops', or 'spaghetti rings'.

History
Canned spaghetti—short lengths in tomato sauce—was available long before rings were introduced. Ring-shaped canned pasta was introduced in 1965 by the Campbell Soup Company under the Franco-American brand, by marketing manager Donald Goerke, nicknamed "the Daddy-O of SpaghettiOs", as a pasta dish that could be eaten without mess. Other shapes considered included cowboys, Indians, astronauts, stars, and sports-themed shapes. Goerke created over 100 products during his 35 years with Campbell, including the Chunky line of soups. SpaghettiOs were introduced nationally without test marketing and with television advertising using the tag line "the neat round spaghetti you can eat with a spoon" and the jingle "Uh-Oh! SpaghettiOs" (these six notes are based on the earlier "Franco-American" jingle) sung by Jimmie Rodgers (loosely based on his 1950s song "Oh-Oh, I'm Falling in Love Again"). Other companies rapidly produced their own spaghetti hoops.

Campbell's launched Spicy Original SpaghettiOs featuring Frank's RedHot in 2023, designed to appeal to millennials, calling it a "hot, more mature twist on a classic offering that our adult consumers grew up enjoying" according to one company executive. Public reaction to the product was mostly negative. One reviewer found the product mild, but ill-suited for younger children, also noting how red it was, compared to the original product.

Nutrition
Ingredients of SpaghettiOs Original are: water, tomato puree (water, tomato paste), enriched pasta (wheat flour, niacin, ferrous sulfate, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, folic acid), high-fructose corn syrup, contains less than 2% of: salt, enzyme modified cheddar cheese (cheddar cheese [cultured milk, salt, enzymes, calcium chloride], water, disodium phosphate, enzymes), vegetable oil (corn, canola, and/or soybean), enzyme modified butter, skim milk, beta carotene for color, citric acid, paprika extract, flavoring. Potential allergens: wheat and milk.

Recall
In June 2010, Campbell recalled 15 million lbs (6.8 million kg) of SpaghettiOs with Meatballs (all that had been produced since December 2008 minus the large fraction that had already been consumed) due to the malfunction of a cooker at one of the company's Texas plants. No reports of illnesses associated with the product and no customer complaints were recorded at the time of the recall.

Controversial Pearl Harbor tweet
On December 7, 2013, the 72nd anniversary of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, SpaghettiOs' Twitter account posted a picture of a smiling cartoon SpaghettiO holding the U.S. flag and captioned, "Take a moment to remember #PearlHarbor with us." The posting was met with criticism by users, who found the tweet to be disrespectful to those who were affected by the attack. The post also quickly spawned parodies, as other users such as comedian Patton Oswalt edited the cartoon SpaghettiO into photos of other national tragedies such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy, 9/11, the Hindenburg disaster, the Space Shuttle Challenger explosion, and the sinking of the Titanic. SpaghettiOs quickly removed the tweet in question and apologized for any offense it may have caused.

Actress and comedian Natasha Leggero faced criticism for remarks regarding the tweet during NBC's New Year's Eve with Carson Daly later that month, where she quipped that "it sucks that the only survivors of Pearl Harbor are being mocked by the only food they can still chew." In response, Leggero remarked that "the amazing courage of American veterans and specifically those who survived Pearl Harbor is [not] in any way diminished by a comedian making a joke about dentures on television".

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

title: SpaghettiOs


text:
Buffalo River (New York)

The Buffalo River drains a 447 sqmi watershed in Western New York state, emptying into the eastern end of Lake Erie at the City of Buffalo. The river has three tributaries: Cayuga Creek, Buffalo Creek, and Cazenovia Creek.

The Buffalo River has been important to the development of western New York, including as the terminus for the Erie Canal beginning in 1825, and later as an industrial area with uses including grain elevators, steel mills and chemical production. When shipping began to bypass the Erie Canal in the 1950s, and later heavy industry declined, the transportation and industrial uses of the river were greatly reduced. Many adjacent factories and grain mills were abandoned. The river and adjacent sites have been the focus of efforts over several decades to improve water quality and restore habitat, most recently in 2011 with the commencement of the Buffalo River Restoration Project.

Geography
The Buffalo River flows eastward from the point of confluence, passing through residential and heavily industrialized parts of the city. The river includes a 6.2 mi federal navigation channel maintained by the United States Army Corps of Engineers at a depth of 23 ft below lake level (along with an additional 1.4 mi of the City Ship Canal). Because of this designation, bridges in the navigable part of the river are required to allow for passage of high vessels, and many of them are drawbridges. The very low hydraulic gradient of the river, along with the dredging, gives the river an estuarine-like character. Much of the shoreline is hardened by riprap, bulkhead                Towns of Arcade, Java, and Sheldon, before flowing into Erie County. The creek flows through Elma and West Seneca, before its confluence with Cayuga Creek in West Seneca.

Cayuga Creek is the northernmost tributary in the watershed. This 40 mi creek begins in primarily farmland/wooded areas and passes through several residential communities, including Cheektowaga, Lancaster, and Depew, before its confluence with Buffalo Creek.

The East Branch of Cazenovia Creek begins in Sardinia, and the West Branch begins in Concord. The land adjacent to these two branches is primarily agricultural and wooded areas, with the exception of several small residential communities. The two branches meet near East Aurora, after which Cazenovia Creek flows through the towns of Aurora, Elma, and West Seneca, and the city of Buffalo until its confluence with the Buffalo River.

History
The Buffalo Creek area is believed to have been held by the Neutral Nation prior to the 1650s, when the Seneca nation and its Iroquois allies conquered the territory during the Beaver Wars. In the spring of 1780, the British established an Indian village on Buffalo Creek for the mostly Seneca people who had been forced off their lands by the destructive Sullivan Expedition of 1779. They had fled to Fort Niagara for refuge with the British. After the war, the Buffalo Creek area was developed further as a Seneca settlement.

On July 8, 1788, Oliver Phelps and Nathaniel Gorham met with Indians of the Five Nations of the Iroquois Confederacy (including Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, and Seneca) at Buffalo Creek to execute a deed or treaty for rights to their lands in New York State east of the Genesee River (see Phelps and Gorham Purchase). In 1838, the Treaty of Buffalo Creek dealt with the disposition of the remaining land in New York held by the nations of the Iroquois Confederation. The federal government released a total of about 5 million acres for sale.

In 1825, the Buffalo River was the western terminus for the Erie Canal, constructed through the Mohawk River valley in New York state. Entry to the river from the Canal was gained via the mouth of a small tributary, Little Buffalo Creek, which was excavated and stabilized to form the Commercial Slip leading from the Erie Canal. The Buffalo River formed the southwest boundary of the rough pentagon that enclosed the "Five Points" or "Canal Street" district, bounded on the northeast by the Erie Canal. When the Canal was completed in 1825, New York Governor Dewitt Clinton's vessel was towed from the Canal through the Commercial Slip and Buffalo River to Lake Erie. There in a celebration ceremony, he poured Atlantic Ocean water into the Lake, and collected lake water to place in the ocean after his return trip to New York City.

Origin of the name
It is believed that the city of Buffalo was named after Buffalo Creek. There are several unsourced theories for the origin of the creek's name. Early French and Moravian explorers reported the abundance of buffalo (meaning American bison) on the south shore of Lake Erie, but their presence on the banks of Buffalo Creek is still a matter of debate. The origin of the name of the creek is still uncertain. Neither the Seneca name (Te-osah-wa, "Place of the Basswoods") or the French name ("River of Horses") survived, so the current name likely dates to the British occupation, which began with the capture of Fort Niagara in 1759. The British engineer John Montresor mentions the name Buffalo Creek four times in his journal of 1764, indicating that the name was in common use at that time. Numerous other Buffalo Creeks are feature names in the United States, many in eastern states. Scholars believe it is likely most were named after the animal, as was done with numerous Beaver Creeks, Otter Creeks, etc.

Contamination and remediation
The Buffalo River and to a lesser degree its tributaries have been the site of heavy industry, although this has declined in recent decades. This, along with large combined sewer overflows along the river, has resulted in highly contaminated sediments and impaired water quality. In 1987, most of the Buffalo River along with the City Ship Canal was listed as one of 43 Great Lakes Areas of Concern in The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement between the United States and Canada. For over 60 years Stanley Spisiak, known as Mr. Buffalo River, fought for the cleanup of the Buffalo River In 2011, the Buffalo River Restoration Project commenced, which includes major dredging to remove contaminated sediment, habitat restoration, and site access projects. According to a statement by the Army Corps of Engineers in the spring of 2012, the project will result in the Buffalo River being removed from the list of Areas of Concern in three to five years.

Recreation
The Buffalo office of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation established the Buffalo River Urban Canoe Trail and published a guide in the 1990s describing the bridges, factories and other points of interest along the river. In 2011, Buffalo River Fest Park was opened along the river, including docks, a boardwalk, and a band stand.

title: Buffalo River (New York)


text:
Urogenital diaphragm

Older texts have asserted the existence of a urogenital diaphragm, also called the triangular ligament, which was described as a layer of the pelvis that separates the deep perineal sac from the upper pelvis, lying between the inferior fascia of the urogenital diaphragm (perineal membrane) and superior fascia of the urogenital diaphragm.

While this term is used to refer to a layer of the pelvis that separates the deep perineal sac from the upper pelvis, such a discrete border of the sac probably does not exist.

While it has no official entry in Terminologia Anatomica, the term is still used occasionally to describe the muscular components of the deep perineal pouch. The urethra and the vagina, though part of the pouch, are usually said to be passing through the urogenital diaphragm, rather than part of the diaphragm itself.

Some researchers still assert that such a diaphragm exists, and the term is still used in the literature.

The urethral diaphragm is an anatomic landmark used in radiologic and urologic classification of urethral injury. Specifically, when a retrograde urethrogram demonstrates extension of contrast from the proximal bulbous urethra into the perineum, there is an increase of grading of the injury from a Type 2 to a Type 3 classification.

The term "urogenital diaphragm" is often confused with the pelvic diaphragm (pelvic floor), which is a true diaphragm supporting many of the pelvic organs.

title: Urogenital diaphragm


text:
1999 MLS supplemental draft

The 1999 Major League Soccer supplemental draft took place in Fort Lauderdale on the afternoon of Sunday, February 7. The second and third rounds of the 1999 MLS College Draft had taken place earlier that morning. In this supplemental draft, a number of teams passed in the second and third rounds. Consequently in 2000, MLS merged the college and supplemental draft into the 2000 MLS SuperDraft.

Unresolved 1999 Supplemental Draft trades

 * 4 February 1998: D.C. United traded Raul Diaz Arce and third round pick in 1999 college draft to New England Revolution for first round pick in 1999 supplemental draft, and first round and second round picks in 1999 college draft.

title: 1999 MLS supplemental draft


text:
User talk:Anti-christ

Hi, just a note, your user name is kind of inflammatory, which is something we try to avoid. I'd recommend changing your username to something less likely to cause conflict. See No offensive usernames.

On that note, however, Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

not only is the username inflammatory this user has no qualms in using foul language on other users - see the talk page for Lin Chong. Chensiyuan 05:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Anti-christ


text:
Robert Fraser (art dealer)

Robert Fraser (13 August 1937 – 27 January 1986), sometimes known as "Groovy Bob", was a London art dealer. He was a figure in the London cultural scene of the mid-to-late 1960s, and was close to members of the Beatles (particularly Paul McCartney) and the Rolling Stones. In February 2015, the exhibition A Strong Sweet Smell of Incense: A Portrait of Robert Fraser, curated by Brian Clarke, was presented by Pace Gallery at the Royal Academy of Arts in London.

Early life and education
Robert Fraser was born on 13 August 1937, the son of banker Sir Lionel Fraser, who had started as a newspaper delivery boy. Lionel Fraser's father was butler to Harry Gordon Selfridge, the founder of the Selfridges department store chain.

Fraser was educated at Eton College, and spent several years in Africa in the 1950s as an officer in the King's African Rifles.

Career
After a period spent working in galleries in the United States he returned to England, and with the help of his father (a wealthy financier who had also been a trustee of the Tate Gallery) established the Robert Fraser Gallery at 69 Duke Street (near Grosvenor Square), London, in 1962. The gallery interior was designed by Cedric Price.

The Robert Fraser Gallery became a focal point for modern art in Britain, and through his exhibitions he helped to launch and promote the work of many important new British and American artists including Peter Blake, Clive Barker, Bridget Riley, Jann Haworth, Richard Hamilton, Gilbert and George, Eduardo Paolozzi, Andy Warhol, Harold Cohen, Jim Dine and Ed Ruscha. Fraser also sold work by René Magritte, Jean Dubuffet, Balthus and Hans Bellmer.

"Swinging Sixties"
In 1966, the Robert Fraser Gallery was prosecuted for staging an exhibition of works by Jim Dine that was described as indecent (but not obscene). The works were removed from the gallery by the Metropolitan Police, and Fraser was charged under a 19th-century vagrancy law that applied to street beggars. He was fined 20 guineas and legal costs.

Fraser became a trendsetter during the Sixties; Paul McCartney has described him as "one of the most influential people of the London Sixties scene". His London flat and his gallery were the foci of a "jet-set" salon of top pop stars, artists, writers and other celebrities, including members of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, photographer Michael Cooper, designer Christopher Gibbs, Marianne Faithfull, Dennis Hopper (who introduced Fraser to satirist Terry Southern), William Burroughs and Kenneth Anger. Because of this, he was given the nickname "Groovy Bob" by Terry Southern. His flat at 23 Mount Street, on the third floor above Scott's restaurant, was described by Barry Miles as one of the "coolest sixties pads in London".

Fraser art-directed the cover for the Beatles' 1967 album Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band – he dissuaded the group from using the original design, a psychedelic artwork created by the design collective The Fool, instead suggesting the pop artists Peter Blake and Jann Haworth, who created the famous collage cover design for which they each won a Grammy Award.

It was through Fraser that Richard Hamilton was selected to design the poster for the White Album. His gallery also hosted You Are Here, Lennon's own foray into avant garde art during 1968.

He was a close friend of the Rolling Stones and was present at the infamous 1967 party at Keith Richards' country house, Redlands, which was raided by police, leading to the subsequent arrests and trials of Mick Jagger, Richards, and Fraser on drug possession charges. The event is commemorated by the 1968 Richard Hamilton artwork Swingeing London 67, a collage of contemporary press clippings about the case, and the portrait of Jagger and Fraser handcuffed together also entitled "Swingeing London".

Fraser always insisted that neither Jagger nor Richards actually had any drugs with them, and that everything found by the police actually belonged to him. During the raid he persuaded the officers that his 20 heroin pills were actually for an upset stomach and offered them only one for testing. Although Jagger and Richards were acquitted on appeal, Fraser pleaded guilty to charges of possession of heroin, and was sentenced to six months' hard labour. After his release Fraser's interest in the gallery declined as his heroin addiction grew worse, and he closed the business in 1969.

Fraser moved down the street to a large 8-room apartment on the 2nd floor of 120 Mount Street; the previous occupant was writer and theatre critic Kenneth Tynan. Keith Richards from the Rolling Stones was living with Fraser at the time, and it was here, sitting by the window in the lounge room, that Richards had the inspiration for the song Gimme Shelter "'I had been sitting by the window of my friend Robert Fraser's apartment on Mount Street in London with an acoustic guitar when suddenly the sky went completely black and an incredible monsoon came down. It was just people running about looking for shelter – that was the germ of the idea. We went further into it until it became, you know, rape and murder are 'just a shot away'.'"

1970s and 1980s, and death
Fraser left the UK and spent several years in India during the 1970s. He returned to London in the early 1980s and opened a second gallery in 1983, with a show of paintings by the stained glass and architectural artist Brian Clarke, but by this time he was suffering from chronic drug and alcohol problems and the gallery never replicated the success of its predecessor, although Fraser was again influential in promoting the work of Clarke, Jean-Michel Basquiat and Keith Haring.

It soon transpired that Fraser was also suffering from AIDS. He was one of the first 'celebrity' victims of the disease in the UK.

In 1985, he sold his Cork Street gallery to Victoria Miro, who subsequently created the successful Victoria Miro Gallery. Fraser seemed disillusioned, and told her at the time "You'll never make a contemporary art gallery work in this country."

He was cared for by the Terence Higgins Trust during his final illness and died in January 1986. He died at his mother's flat in London.

title: Robert Fraser (art dealer)


text:
Talk:Ukrainian subdivisions/to do

 * Set up the WikiProject page.
 * Post messages on the relevant project and user talk pages.
 * Move in-progress discussion to this talk page.

title: Talk:Ukrainian subdivisions/to do


text: File:The Doobie Brothers - Rockin' Down the Highway.jpg


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Australia/To-do/Politicians

This is a to-do list for Australian politician articles

If you do create an article, please:

 * Note that the standard disambiguator is 1stname 2ndname (Australian politician). Where there are two Australian politicians of the same name, consider using 1stname 2ndname (Stateian politician).
 * Ensure correct categorisation:
 * MHR's should be in their division category, for example Category:Members of the Australian House of Representatives for Fisher as well as Category:Members of the Australian House of Representatives
 * Senators should be in their State senate category, for example Category:Members of the Australian Senate for New South Wales, as well as Category:Members of the Australian Senate
 * Remove the name from the respective red link section/s below

Note that every MHR and Senator who ever held a ministerial office is in List of Australian ministries.

Tables
I created these tables to keep track of all the pollies.. obviously it will be extended to cover all electorates and all federal elections. I just wanted to show people what I was planning before I did the whole thing. Eventually, I will expect it to look like WikiProject Sports Olympics/Articles.

Note these are NOT intended to be used in articles, they are for managing existing and forthcoming articles. The idea is to use the red/blue links to see what has been created, and what needs to be done. The 'related changes' can also be used to keep track of recent edits.

The shading indicates party affiliation - I will get rid of this if people think it isn't useful, or makes the links harder to read - and if people really want, I can attempt to use various shades of colours to indicate safety levels of seats, but that might be a bit much! Also note I'm not attempting to make the initials of the MPs unique, they are just there so there is some text to link the MP article to.

-- Chuq 23:28, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sample senate table is done.. though it takes a lot longer than the HR one, I've only done as far back as the last double dissolution of the senate... and again, only for Tas, so far. -- Chuq 00:30, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I've updated the Senate table below - it was a real bastard to do! There are some figures around the 1983-1984 election that aren't complete on Adam's site. But most of the rest is in there.


text:
User talk:Sweet tia

create a page that links me you say...hmmmmmmm

[sweet_tiaswidget]

Hello, "Sweet tia" and welcome to Wikipedia. A few tips for you:

. -- Infrogmation 03:56, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Peruse Welcome, newcomers and associated pages, such as
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * You can experiment in the Sandbox.
 * Sign talk page entries with ~, which is automatically converted to a name and date.
 * If you have any questions, see Help, or you can a question at the Help desk.
 * I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian.

re: Motivation through music
Good evening. In December 2004, you wrote an article on Motivation through music. It was subsequently nominated for deletion under the no original research rule. This is a very common stumbling block for many new contributors. There was a recommendation in the discussion that this article might be better suited for WikiSource - a companion wiki-project which is designed to have looser standards on publication of original thought and analysis. If you agree that this is an appropriate solution, please contact me via my Talk page (or any other administrator) and I'll help you gather up the content and move it to WikiSource. Thank you. Rossami (talk) 06:18, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Images listed for deletion
Some of your images or media files have been listed for deletion. Please see Images and media for deletion if you are interested in preserving them. Thank you.  T ennis  Dy N ami T e  (sign here) 16:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)  T ennis   Dy N ami T e  (sign here) 16:45, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Image:Music2.jpg
 * Image:Music3.jpg
 * Image:Music4.jpg

File permission problem with File:Music1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Music1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. ~ Rob 13 Talk 22:56, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

title: User talk:Sweet tia


text:
Rockin' down the Highway: The Wildlife Concert

Rockin’ Down the Highway: The Wildlife Concert is the second double live album by American rock band The Doobie Brothers, released in 1996 (see 1996 in music). The concerts were performed to benefit the Wildlife Conservation Society, hence the album's title.

The album marked the first appearance on a Doobie Brothers album of guitarist John McFee and drummer Keith Knudsen since rejoining the group in 1993 after an eleven-year absence. Two other former members also appeared - keyboardist/singer/songwriter Michael McDonald performed on three tracks he had written and sung during his time with the group while saxophonist/keyboardist Cornelius Bumpus, who had been a member in the early 1980s, featured as a sidesman.

Two tracks had not previously appeared on the group's albums. Slow Burn was a new track while Wild Ride had been on Patrick Simmons' solo album Take Me to the Highway released the same year.

Track listing
Disc 1
 * 1) "Dangerous" (Patrick Simmons) – 5:58
 * 2) "Jesus Is Just Alright" (Arthur Reid Reynolds) – 4:51
 * 3) "Take Me in Your Arms (Rock Me a Little While)" (Holland-Dozier-Holland) – 3:48
 * 4) "Slow Burn" (Tom Johnston, John McFee, Keith Knudsen, Michael Hossack) – 4:44
 * 5) "Dependin' on You" (Simmons, Michael McDonald) – 4:13
 * 6) "Another Park, Another Sunday" (Johnston) – 5:04
 * 7) "The Doctor" (Johnston, Charlie Midnight, Eddie Schwartz) – 4:31
 * 8) "Slack Key Soquel Rag" (Simmons) – 1:59
 * 9) "South City Midnight Lady" (Simmons) – 5:37
 * 10) "Eyes of Silver" (Johnston) – 3:12
 * 11) "Black Water" (Simmons) – 4:32
 * 12) "Takin' It to the Streets" (McDonald) – 4:42

Disc 2
 * 1) "Rockin' Down the Highway" (Johnston) – 3:28
 * 2) "Minute by Minute" (McDonald, Lester Abrams) – 4:22
 * 3) "Wild Ride" (Simmons, Midnight) – 3:54
 * 4) "China Grove" (Johnston) – 4:02
 * 5) "Dark Eyed Cajun Woman" (Johnston) – 5:58
 * 6) "Neal's Fandango" (Simmons) – 3:27
 * 7) "Without You" (Johnston) – 6:45
 * 8) "Clear as the Driven Snow" (Simmons) – 5:22
 * 9) "Excited" (Johnston, Jerry Lynn Williams) – 5:30
 * 10) "What a Fool Believes" (McDonald, Kenny Loggins) – 3:54
 * 11) "Long Train Runnin'" (Johnston) – 5:55
 * 12) "Listen to the Music" (Johnston) – 5:29

Personnel
The Doobie Brothers

 * Tom Johnston - lead and backing vocals, guitars
 * Patrick Simmons - lead and backing vocals, guitars
 * John McFee - backing vocals, guitars, slide guitar, pedal steel guitar, violin
 * Michael Hossack - drums
 * Keith Knudsen - backing vocals, drums

Former Doobie Brothers appearing as guests

 * Michael McDonald - lead vocals and keyboards on "Takin' It to the Streets", "Minute by Minute" and "What a Fool Believes"
 * Cornelius Bumpus - backing vocals, lead vocal on "Jesus Is Just Alright", saxophones, flute, keyboards

Additional personnel

 * Skylark - backing vocals, bass
 * Danny Hull - backing vocals, saxophones, harmonica, keyboards, percussion
 * Dale Ockerman - backing vocals, keyboards, guitar
 * Guy Allison - keyboards
 * Carlos Guaico - backing vocals, percussion
 * Buck Johnson - backing vocals, percussion

Production

 * Producers: Charlie Midnight, The Doobie Brothers
 * Executive Producers: Jeff Jones, Andy Kadison
 * Engineer: John Harris
 * Assistant Engineer: Tom Cadley
 * Mastering: Gavin Lurssen, Doug Sax
 * Mixing: Joel Soyffer
 * Mixing Assistant: Joe Warlick
 * Photography: Danny Clinch
 * Design: Erwin Gorostiza
 * Art Direction: Erwin Gorostiza


text:
Traffic grooming

Traffic grooming is the process of grouping many small telecommunications flows into larger units, which can be processed as single entities. For example, in a network using both time-division multiplexing (TDM) and wavelength-division multiplexing (WDM), two flows which are destined for a common node can be placed on the same wavelength, allowing them to be dropped by a single optical add-drop multiplexer. Often the objective of grooming is minimizing the cost of the network. The cost of line terminating equipment (LTE) (also called add/drop multiplexers or ADMs) is the most dominant component in an optical WDM network's cost. Thus grooming typically involves minimizing the usage of ADMs.

This is similar to the use of virtual channels and virtual paths in ATM networks.

Effective grooming requires consideration of the topology of the network and the different routes in use. This is especially useful when dealing with mesh networks.

Grooming Algorithms
The traffic grooming problem has proven to be computationally intractable in the general case. Hence heuristic solutions are typically used.

Electrical-Layer Grooming
Grooms electrical signals at a granularity of ODUk(k =1, 2(e), 3, 4, or flex).

 * Services are transmitted to tributary boards and groomed to line boards through the cross-connect board, encapsulated and mapped to OTU signals on the line boards, and then transmitted to the WDM side.
 * Through electrical-layer grooming, services of different granularity are groomed and encapsulated into one wavelength and output to the WDM side. This enables multiple services to share the bandwidth, greatly improving bandwidth utilization.

Optical-Layer Grooming
Grooms optical signals at a granularity of wavelength (λ) by flexibly selecting transmission paths.
 * After receiving OTU optical signals, the ROADM board creates optical cross-connection paths internally and outputs the signals to specified egresses. Each egress corresponds to a specific path
 * Operation personnel can remotely control the transmission paths of optical signals by creating and adjusting cross-connection paths on the NMS
 * Optical-layer grooming used together with the ASON technology can implement automatic fault detection and line adjustment to ensure normal transmission of services.

title: Traffic grooming


text:
User:KristenB

Here i am creating a page where i can link back to WidgetWiki KristenWidgetWiki

title: User:KristenB


text:
User talk:KristenB

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

REading readiness
In order to make internal links within wikipedia, don't put down the whole URL, but just use two square brackets on each side of the word, like this: frog ... that and other tips are in the Tutorial.

As for the article Reading readiness, much of it reads like a personal essay, giving somebody's opinion, rather than an encyclopedia article. Perhaps you'd like to try polishing it a bit? - DavidWBrooks 21:44, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Image:Baby and grandfather reading.jpg
Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 00:17, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Two girls reading.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Two girls reading.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:KristenB


text:
Ambrotype

The ambrotype, also known as a collodion positive in the UK, is a positive photograph on glass made by a variant of the wet plate collodion process. Following the invention of daguerreotypes, cheaper than the French invention, ambrotypes came to replace them. Like a print on paper, it is viewed by reflected light. Like the daguerreotype or the prints produced by a Polaroid camera, each is a unique original that could only be duplicated by using a camera to copy it.

The ambrotype was introduced in the 1850s. During the 1860s it was superseded by the tintype, a similar photograph on thin black-lacquered iron, hard to distinguish from an ambrotype if under glass.

The term ambrotype comes from ἄμβροτος ambrotos, "immortal", and τύπος typos, "impression".

Process
One side of a clean glass plate was coated with a thin layer of iodized collodion, then dipped in a silver nitrate solution. The plate was exposed in the camera while still wet. Exposure times varied from five to sixty seconds or more depending on the brightness of the lighting and the speed of the camera lens. The plate was then developed and fixed. The resulting negative, when viewed by reflected light against a black background, appears to be a positive image: the clear areas look black, and the exposed, opaque areas appear relatively light. This effect was integrated by backing the plate with black velvet; by taking the picture on a plate made of dark reddish-colored glass (the result was called a ruby ambrotype); or by coating one side of the plate with black varnish. Either the emulsion side or the bare side could be coated: if the bare side was blackened, the thickness of the glass added a sense of depth to the image. In either case, another plate of glass was put over the fragile emulsion side to protect it, and the whole was mounted in a metal frame and kept in a protective case. In some instances the protective glass was cemented directly to the emulsion, generally with a balsam resin. This protected the image well but tended to darken it. Ambrotypes were sometimes hand-tinted; untinted ambrotypes are monochrome, gray or tan in their lightest areas.

History
The ambrotype was based on the wet plate collodion process invented by Frederick Scott Archer. Ambrotypes were deliberately underexposed negatives made by that process and optimized for viewing as positives instead. In the US, ambrotypes first came into use in the early 1850s. In 1854, James Ambrose Cutting of Boston took out several patents relating to the process. Although Cutting, the patent holder, had named the process after himself, it appears the term, "ambrotype" itself may have been first coined in the gallery of Marcus Aurelius Root, a well-known daguerreotypist, as documented in his 1864 book The Camera and the Pencil as follows:

"After considerable improvements, this process was first introduced, in 1854, into various Daguerrean establishments, in the Eastern and Western States, by Cutting & Rehn. In June of this year, Cutting procured patents for the process, though Langdell had already worked it from the printed formulas.

"The process has since been introduced, as a legitimate business, into the leading establishments of our country. The positive branch of it; i.e. a solar impression upon one glass-plate, which is covered by a second hermetically sealed thereto, is entitled the "Ambrotype," (or the "imperishable picture"), a name devised in my gallery.

Root also states (pp. 373): "Isaac Rehn, formerly a successful daguerreotypist, in company with Cutting, of Boston, perfected and introduced through the United States the "Ambrotype," or the positive on glass." What isn't mentioned in the referenced book is the particular year in which the term "ambrotype" was first used.

Ambrotypes were much less expensive to produce than daguerreotypes, the medium that predominated when they were introduced, and did not have the bright mirror-like metallic surface that could make daguerreotypes troublesome to view and which some people disliked. An ambrotype, however, appeared dull and drab when compared with the brilliance of a well-made and properly viewed daguerreotype.

By the late 1850s, the ambrotype was overtaking the daguerreotype in popularity. In 1858, the New York City Police Department, inspired by the pioneering Criminal Investigation Department in Glasgow, Scotland, used ambrotypes to establish a "rogues' gallery", consisting of portraits of wanted criminals and arrested villains. By the mid-1860s, the ambrotype itself was being replaced by the tintype, a similar image on a sturdy black-lacquered thin iron sheet, as well as by photographic albumen paper prints made from glass plate collodion negatives.

title: Ambrotype


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pissismi

Pissismi
Non-notable, or neologism, or not English. 8 displayed google hits. Niteowlneils 03:57, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete - looks like bs to me. Cavebear42 04:01, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It appears to be a Finnish term. I get 295 Google hits, although some appear to be links to a site with this word in the URL. Since I don't speak the language, I can't tell if it's a widely used term or not. Delete, unless someone can show that it's a notable term. --Slowking Man 06:34, Oct 4, 2004 (UTC)
 * pissis is a Finnish slang word for a type of a teenager the list in article details. However, the article fails to mention the most characteristic trait of pissis: a habit of urinating/vomitting in public places when drunk (and by definition, pissis is drunk often!), usually regardless of any spectators. It most likely derives from Finnish colloquial verb pissata, meaning to urinate and was originally used for underage girls only. It is quite a new word but known to most native speakers under age of 20. pissismi seems to be a neologism conjugated from pissis, and I have never heard it spoken. It was probably coined by authors of this article. My vote is delete, unless someone wants to start a Finnish slang Wiktionary project and move this there. jni 14:37, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. JamesMLane 06:36, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologism.  SWAdair | Talk  10:18, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. See my comments from a few days ago on Talk:Pissismi. Timbo 18:38, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable non-English slang.   — Gwalla | Talk 18:50, 4 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete pseudo-encyclopaedic article concerning non-notable neologism. Fire Star 20:32, 5 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
Paul Adams (New Zealand politician)

Paul Gavin Adams (born 1948) is a politician and former rally driving champion from New Zealand.

Early years
Adams was originally a carpenter and joiner, but later established a business manufacturing outdoor playground equipment. Later, he became a professional rally driver, and won three prestigious New Zealand championships. He also owned a Kia Motors and Suzuki dealerships in Auckland.

Member of Parliament
Adams is a member of Pentecostal City Impact Church, and as a result, became involved in Christian politics in New Zealand. After first being a member of the Christian Heritage Party, he joined the religious-based Future New Zealand party. Future New Zealand later merged with United New Zealand to form the modern United Future New Zealand group, which Adams remained a member of until 2005. In the 2002 election, Adams was ranked ninth on the United Future party list. Thanks to the unexpectedly strong performance of United Future, the party gained enough votes for eight seats, leaving Adams just outside Parliament. Later, Kelly Chal, a higher-ranked candidate, was forced to withdraw because she did not have New Zealand citizenship, which she had not realised was necessary. Adams, as the next candidate on the list, entered Parliament in her place.

Adams was one of the more conservative members of Parliament. After he was elected, it was reported that he had made a written submission on the 1993 Human Rights Bill saying that people with AIDS should not be allowed to "run loose". He also spoke out about subjects like abortion, and fasted for 21 days to oppose the civil unions legislation, which was passed regardless.

Independent
On 15 August 2005 Adams left United Future to stand as an independent in the East Coast Bays Electorate. He gained 5809 votes after a short five-week campaign, which placed him third overall. He was subsequently involved with a proposed new party to be established by his former colleague Gordon Copeland and Destiny New Zealand. However, these negotiations collapsed, but Adams then became the Deputy Leader of The Family Party.

Adams stood as a candidate for The Family Party in the East Coast Bays electorate in the 2008 election. He polled third, behind National candidate Murray McCully and Labour candidate Vivienne Goldsmith. As The Family Party failed to win any other electorate or list seats, Adams did not re-enter Parliament.

Adams stood at the 2023 election for the NewZeal party at number 2 on the party list. Adams also contested the East Coast Bays electorate, coming fourth place with 890 votes. Overall, NewZeal only won 0.56 percent (16,126 votes), below the five percent threshold needed to enter Parliament.

title: Paul Adams (New Zealand politician)