text:
Strange Times (The Chameleons album)

Strange Times is the third studio album by English rock band the Chameleons. It was released on 1 September 1986 in the United Kingdom, and on 29 September 1986 in the United States, by Geffen Records. Initial copies of the North American vinyl release included a bonus LP featuring six non-album tracks, which would later be included as bonus tracks on the CD release in 1993. Two singles were released from the album: "Tears" and "Swamp Thing".

Strange Times was met with largely positive reviews, with Post-Punk.com calling the album one of 100 essential dream pop releases and stating, "the Manchester quartet's third record is arguably their dreamiest, trading in much of their early angst while swinging for the fences with a tremendous collection of songs."

Strange Times and the follow-up EP Tony Fletcher Walked on Water (recorded in 1987 and released in 1990) would be the band's final studio releases for nearly 15 years, as tensions within the group caused a breakup that saw the band members pursue other projects.

Recording
According to Chameleons frontman Mark Burgess, "The album was recorded at Jacob's Studio in Surrey, south of London over a period of five weeks. Again the material was only loosely sketched and we didn't really have any idea how the album would turn out. We'd spent a month or so getting the ideas together living in a small house in the Lake District of England and rehearsing the ideas in a school hall, specially hired, just outside the village of Hawkshead."

Release
The first single from the album was "Tears", released on 16 June 1986. The album version (credited as the "original arrangement") differs from the single version (credited as "full arrangement"); the original arrangement is an acoustic version with a different ending, while the full arrangement is electric. The single included the B-sides "Paradiso" and "Inside Out".

Strange Times was released 1 September 1986 on the Geffen label. Initial American pressings of the record came with a bonus 12" with six additional tracks, two of which are covers. The American cassette also had the same bonus tracks, split up so that each side of the cassette contained half of the bonus tracks. The record did not have a "B" side; it was credited as 'Side A' and 'Side A+'.

The album was never released on CD in any territory until 1993. Although Geffen released it as a two-disc set with all of the bonus tracks in the UK and Germany, the decision was made to omit one of the bonus tracks ("Ever After") from the American version to facilitate its release on a single disc.

The album's second single, "Swamp Thing", was released on the same day as the album. The formats of the single included a cover of David Bowie's "John, I'm Only Dancing" as the B-side.

A promotional-only 12" vinyl single was also issued in 1986, featuring album opener "Mad Jack" on the A-side and "Time/The End of Time" and the band's cover of the Beatles' "Tomorrow Never Knows" on the B-side.

Reception
Strange Times was praised by the critics who reviewed it. Ian Gittins of Melody Maker called it "a marvellous departure" from their previous work and "a wonderful record." Robert Palmer of The New York Times described it as "the band's most inventive and winning album yet and as a fine a record as any pop-rock guitar band has made this year. [...] it should delight just about anyone."

Legacy and influence
Burgess later said, "Strange Times is my favourite. Personally, I believe it was the best lyrical work I'd done with the band and some of the best vocal performances, and I think the Chameleons really began to mature and move forward with this album."

The album was included on an unranked list of 100 essential dream pop releases on independent music website Post-Punk.com in 2018.

In a post on his Instagram account on 22 March 2018, Oasis guitarist Noel Gallagher cited Strange Times as an early influence on his songwriting: "...I'd forgotten how much this album meant to me. It came out in '86. I was 19!! I've been listening to it every day since and I have to say it's blown my mind...again! It must have influenced my early years as a song writer because I can hear ME in it everywhere!!..."

Personnel
The Chameleons
 * Mark Burgess (credited as "Birdy") – vocals, bass guitar
 * Reg Smithies – guitar
 * John Lever – drums, percussion
 * Dave Fielding – guitar, ARP String Ensemble

Technical
 * David M. Allen – production
 * Mark Saunders – engineering
 * Paul Crocket – engineering assistance, piano
 * Beki – engineering assistance, piano
 * Reg Smithies – cover illustration

title: Strange Times (The Chameleons album)


text:
Artgal

Artgal, Arthal, or Arthgal may refer to:

 * Artgal mac Cathail (died 791), King of Connacht
 * Arthgal ap Dyfnwal (died 872), King of Alt Clut

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

title: Artgal


text:
Po2

Po2, pO2, PO2, or PO2 may refer to:

 * A military rank:
 * Petty Officer 2nd Class in the Canadian military
 * Petty Officer Second Class in the United States military
 * Polikarpov Po-2 or U-2, a Soviet aeroplane
 * Partial pressure of Oxygen, that is, amount of oxygen in the blood (normally referred to as Dissolved Oxygen)
 * PO2: Phosphorus dioxide, a gaseous free radical that plays a role in the chemiluminescence of phosphorus and phosphine.
 * Po(2-): Polonide anion
 * a power of two in mathematics

title: Po2


text:
Sarapady

Sarapady is a small village in Karnataka State, India on the banks of the Nethravathi river in the Bantwal taluk, Dakshina Kannada District.

There were plans of building a dam near it which necessitated the evacuation of the villagers from Sarapady, but the plans have been stalled. However a vented dam in Sarapady now helps MRPL pump water from Nethravathi.

Temple
Sarabeshwara temple in Sarapady. And sadashiva temple in kadeshivalaya. .

Church
St. john church in Allipade.

Localities

 * Odadadka

Mosque
Ajilamogaru Mosque.

Periyapade
Sri Dugalaya, Kodamanithaya daivastana in periyapade.

title: Sarapady


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talia Katz

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy per Deletion of vanity articles. mikka (t) 23:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Talia Katz
Marked for speedy deletion for vanity, but under the new policy to deal with vanity articles I am posting it here on VFD for a second opinion. The article claims that she is an actress and "has created quite a following in the vagina monologues". Zzyzx11 (Talk) 11:33, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless verifiable content added. No trace of this following on Google. -- Visviva 12:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete no results for "Talia Katz" Vagina search see Capitalistroadster 13:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable aspiring actress. Dcarrano 13:32, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete ^ -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 15:08, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy, see the examples give on the talk page for the new policy. VfD is free from the chains of this kind of stuff now!-Splash 21:53, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Lower North Shore (Sydney)

In Australia, Lower North Shore refers to the northern suburbs of Sydney adjoining Sydney Harbour. The three bodies of water that surround the Lower North Shore are Lane Cove River on its western border, Sydney Harbour on its south side, and Middle Harbour on its east. The Lower North Shore borders the Upper North Shore when the Lane Cover River and Middle Harbour are at their closest.

Lower North Shore encompasses suburbs belonging to the local government areas of Municipality of Mosman, City of Willoughby, Municipality of Lane Cove, and North Sydney Council. The Lower North Shore, in this narrow sense, roughly corresponds with the Parish of Willoughby, a cadastral unit used for land title purposes.

When the regional name is used in a wider sense, the suburbs of, , and , which lie west of the Lane Cove River, are sometimes also considered part of the Lower North Shore, although more often the term North Shore applies to the suburbs between Middle Harbour and the Lane Cove River.

The Lower North Shore suburbs adjacent to the water are Longueville, Northwood, Neutral Bay, Greenwich, Waverton, Wollstonecraft, Mosman, Cremorne, Lane Cove, Lavender Bay, McMahons Point, Milsons Point, Cammeray, North Sydney, Chatswood, Artarmon, Willoughby, Crows Nest, Riverview, Castlecrag, and Northbridge.

The region is home to hundreds of parks and reserves, including Sydney Harbour National Park and the Lane Cove National Park. Local sportsgrounds include North Sydney Oval, the region's largest in capacity, followed by Chatswood Oval. Major waterways in the region include Port Jackson, the Lane Cove River, the Parramatta River, Middle Harbour and the many creek systems that branch out from these main aquatic lifelines.

The Lower North Shore is the location of Kirribilli House and Admiralty House, the official residences in Sydney of the Prime Minister of Australia and Governor-General of Australia respectively.

title: Lower North Shore (Sydney)


text: File:George (magazine).jpg

title: File:George (magazine).jpg


text: Category:Filipino businesspeople

title: Category:Filipino businesspeople


text: Category:Filipino people by occupation

title: Category:Filipino people by occupation


text:
Edith Grossman

Edith Marion Grossman (née Dorph; March 22, 1936 – September 4, 2023) was an American literary translator. Known for her work translating Latin American and Spanish literature to English, she translated the works of Nobel laureate Mario Vargas Llosa, Nobel laureate Gabriel García Márquez, Mayra Montero, Augusto Monterroso, Jaime Manrique, Julián Ríos, Álvaro Mutis, and Miguel de Cervantes. She was a recipient of the PEN/Ralph Manheim Medal for Translation and the 2022 Thornton Wilder Prize for Translation.

Biography
Born Edith Marion Dorph in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Grossman lived in New York City later in life. She received a B.A. and M.A. from the University of Pennsylvania, did graduate work at the University of California, Berkeley, and received a Ph.D. from New York University with a thesis on the Chilean "anti-poet" Nicanor Parra. She taught at NYU and Columbia University early in her career. Her career as a translator began in 1972 when a friend, Jo-Anne Engelbert, asked her to translate a story for a collection of short works by the Argentine avant-garde writer Macedonio Fernández. Grossman subsequently changed the focus of her work from scholarship and criticism to translation and, in 1990, left teaching to dedicate her energies full-time to translating.

Grossman was known to her friends as "Edie". She married Norman Grossman in 1965; the couple had two sons, but divorced in 1984. Edith Grossman died from pancreatic cancer at her home in Manhattan on September 4, 2023, at the age of 87.

Translation work
In a speech delivered at the 2003 PEN Tribute to Gabriel García Márquez, she explained her method:

Fidelity is surely our highest aim, but a translation is not made with tracing paper. It is an act of critical interpretation. Let me insist on the obvious: Languages trail immense, individual histories behind them, and no two languages, with all their accretions of tradition and culture, ever dovetail perfectly. They can be linked by translation, as a photograph can link movement and stasis, but it is disingenuous to assume that either translation or photography, or acting for that matter, are representational in any narrow sense of the term. Fidelity is our noble purpose, but it does not have much, if anything, to do with what is called literal meaning. A translation can be faithful to tone and intention, to meaning. It can rarely be faithful to words or syntax, for these are peculiar to specific languages and are not transferable.

Grossman was notable for advocating that her name appear on the covers of the books she translated, alongside the author. Translators had traditionally been uncredited, which Grossman facetiously said implied that "a magic wand" had been waved to change the language of the text. In a 2019 interview, she said that "It's bloody well about time that the translator not be treated as a poor relation, that the translator is treated as an equal partner in the enterprise... Reviewers used to write as though translation had appeared through kind of a divine miracle. An immaculate conception!"

Awards and recognition
Grossman's translation of Miguel de Cervantes's Don Quixote, published in 2003, is considered one of the finest English-language translations of the Spanish novel by some authors and critics, including Carlos Fuentes and Harold Bloom, who called her "the Glenn Gould of translators, because she, too, articulates every note." However, some Cervantes scholars have been more critical of her translation. Tom Lathrop, himself a translator of Don Quixote, critiqued her translation in the journal of the Cervantes Society of America, saying

"Serious students of literature in translation should consider looking elsewhere for more faithful translations, such as Starkie and the discontinued and lamented Ormsby-Douglas-Jones version. There are just too many things that just are not right, or are confusing, in this translation."

Both Lathrop and Daniel Eisenberg criticized her for a poor choice of Spanish edition as source, leading to inaccuracies; Eisenberg added that "she is the most textually ignorant of the modern translators".

Grossman received the PEN/Ralph Manheim Medal for Translation in 2006. In 2008, she received the Arts and Letters Award in Literature awarded by the American Academy of Arts and Letters. In 2010, Grossman was awarded the Queen Sofia Spanish Institute Translation Prize for her 2008 translation of Antonio Muñoz Molina's A Manuscript of Ashes. In 2016, she received the Officer's Cross of the Order of Civil Merit awarded by King Felipe VI of Spain. The American Academy of Arts and Letters awarded her its Thornton Wilder Prize for translation in 2022.

In 1990 Gabriel García Márquez said that he preferred reading his own novels in their English translations by Grossman and Gregory Rabassa.

Selected translations
Over a period of more than 40 years, Grossman translated around 60 books from Spanish, including:

Miguel de Cervantes:
 * Don Quixote, Ecco/Harper Collins, 2003. ISBN 978-0060934347.
 * Exemplary Novels, Yale University Press, 2016. ISBN 978-0300230536.

Gabriel García Márquez:
 * Love in the Time of Cholera, Knopf, 1988. ISBN 978-0394561615.
 * The General in His Labyrinth, Penguin, 1991. ISBN 978-0224030830.
 * Strange Pilgrims, Knopf, 1993. ISBN 978-0679425663.
 * Of Love and Other Demons, Knopf, 1995. ISBN 978-0679438533.
 * News of a Kidnapping, Knopf, 1997. ISBN 978-0375400513.
 * Living to Tell the Tale, Jonathan Cape, 2003. ISBN 978-1400041343.
 * Memories of My Melancholy Whores, Vintage, 2005. ISBN 978-1400095940.

Mario Vargas Llosa:
 * Death in the Andes, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1996. ISBN 978-0571175482.
 * The Notebooks of Don Rigoberto, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1998. ISBN 978-0374223274.
 * The Feast of the Goat, Picador, 2001. ISBN 978-0312420277.
 * The Bad Girl, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007. ISBN 978-0374182434.
 * In Praise of Reading and Fiction: The Nobel Lecture, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011. ISBN 978-0374175757.
 * Dream of the Celt, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2012. ISBN 978-0374143466.
 * The Discreet Hero, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2015. ISBN 978-0374146740.
 * The Neighborhood, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2018. ISBN 978-0374155124.

Ariel Dorfman:
 * Last Waltz in Santiago and Other Poems of Exile and Disappearance, Penguin, 1988. ISBN 978-0140586084.
 * In Case of Fire in a Foreign Land: New and Collected Poems from Two Languages, Duke University Press, 2002. ISBN 978-0822329879.

Mayra Montero:
 * In the Palm of Darkness, HarperCollins, 1997. ISBN 978-0060187033.
 * The Messenger: A Novel, Harper Perennial, 2000. ISBN 978-0060929619.
 * The Last Night I Spent With You, HarperCollins, 2000. ISBN 978-0060952907.
 * The Red of His Shadow, HarperCollins, 2001. ISBN 978-0060952914.
 * Dancing to "Almendra": A Novel, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2007. ISBN 978-0374102777.
 * Captain of the Sleepers: A Novel, Picador, 2007. ISBN 978-0312425432.

Álvaro Mutis:
 * The Adventures of Maqroll: Four Novellas, HarperCollins, 1995. ISBN 978-0060170042.
 * The Adventures and Misadventures of Maqroll, NYRB Classics, 2002. ISBN 978-0940322912.

Other translations:

 * José Luis Llovio-Menéndez, Insider: My Hidden Life as a Revolutionary in Cuba, Bantam Books, 1988. ISBN 978-0553051148.
 * Augusto Monterroso, Complete Works and Other Stories, University of Texas Press, 1995. ISBN 978-0292751842.
 * Julián Ríos, Loves That Bind, Knopf, 1998. ISBN 978-0375400582.
 * Eliseo Alberto, Caracol Beach: A Novel, Vintage, 2001. ISBN 978-0375705069.
 * Julián Ríos, Monstruary, Knopf, 2001. ISBN 978-0375408236.
 * Pablo Bachelet, Gustavo Cisneros: The Pioneer, Planeta, 2004. ISBN 978-0974872483.
 * Carmen Laforet, Nada: A Novel, The Modern Library, 2007. ISBN 978-0679643456.
 * The Golden Age: Poems of the Spanish Renaissance, W. W. Norton, 2007. ISBN 978-0393329919.
 * Antonio Muñoz Molina, A Manuscript of Ashes, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2008. ISBN 978-0151014101.
 * Luis de Góngora, The Solitudes, Penguin, 2011. ISBN 978-0143106388.
 * Carlos Rojas, The Ingenious Gentleman and Poet Federico Garcia Lorca Ascends to Hell, Yale University Press, 2013. ISBN 978-0300167764.
 * Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz, Selected Works, W. W. Norton, 2016. ISBN 978-0393351880.
 * Carlos Rojas, The Valley of the Fallen, Yale University Press, 2018. ISBN 978-0300217964.

Essay:
 * Why Translation Matters, Yale University Press, 2010. ISBN 978-0300126563.

title: Edith Grossman


text:
Wikipedia:Plagiarism

Plagiarism is taking credit for someone else's writing as your own, including their language and ideas, without providing adequate credit. The University of Cambridge defines plagiarism as: "submitting as one's own work, irrespective of intent to deceive, that which derives in part or in its entirety from the work of others without due acknowledgement."

Wikipedia has three core content policies, of which two make it easy to plagiarize inadvertently. No original research prohibits editors from adding their own ideas to articles, and Verifiability requires that articles be based on reliable published sources. These policies mean that Wikipedians are highly vulnerable to accusations of plagiarism because we must stick closely to sources, but not too closely. Because plagiarism can occur without an intention to deceive, concerns should focus on educating the editor and cleaning up the article.

Sources are annotated using inline citations, typically in the form of footnote (see Citing sources). In addition to an inline citation, in-text attribution is usually required when quoting or closely paraphrasing source material (for example: "John Smith wrote that the building looked spectacular," or "According to Smith (2012) ..."). The Manual of Style requires in-text attribution when quoting a full sentence or more. Naming the author in the text allows the reader to see that it relies heavily on someone else's ideas, without having to search in the footnote. You can avoid inadvertent plagiarism by remembering these rules of thumb:

Plagiarism and copyright infringement are not the same thing. Copyright infringement occurs when content is used in a way that violates a copyright holder's exclusive right. Giving credit does not mean the infringement has not occurred, so be careful not to quote so much of a non-free source that you violate the non-free content guideline. Similarly, even though there is no copyright issue, public-domain content is plagiarized if used without acknowledging the source. For advice on how to avoid violating copyright on Wikipedia, see Copyright violation. For how to deal with copying material from free sources, such as public-domain sources, see below.

Forms of plagiarism
Plagiarism is presenting someone else's work – including their language and ideas – as your own, whether intentionally or inadvertently. Because it can happen easily and by mistake, all editors are strongly advised to actively identify any potential issues in their writing. Plagiarism can take several forms.

Free and copyrighted sources

 * The above example is the most egregious form of plagiarism and the least likely to be accidental.

 * This can look as though the editor is trying to pass the text off as their own. It can happen by accident when inline citations are moved around during an edit, losing text–source integrity. It can also happen when editors rely on general references listed in a References section, without using inline citations.

 * Summarizing a source in your own words does not in itself mean you have not plagiarized, if you are still relying heavily on the work of another writer. Credit should be given in the form of an inline citation.

Copyrighted sources only

 * Here the editor is not trying to pass the work off as their own, but it is still regarded as plagiarism, because the source's words were used without in-text attribution. The more of the source's words that were copied, and the more distinctive the phrasing, the more serious the violation. Adding in-text attribution ("John Smith states that ...") always avoids accusations of plagiarism, though it does not invariably avoid copyright violations. See Respecting copyright below for more on using copyrighted sources. Be cautious when using in-text attribution, because it can lead to other problems. For example, "According to Professor Susan Jones, human-caused increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide have led to global warming" might be a violation of NPOV, because this is the consensus of many scientists, not only a claim by Jones. In such cases, plagiarism can be avoided by summarizing information in your own words or acknowledging explicitly that while the words are from Jones, the view is widespread.

Avoiding plagiarism

 * For avoidance of plagiarism of text copied from compatibly licensed copyleft publications and public domain publications, see also the section below: Copying material from free sources

You can avoid plagiarism by summarizing source material in your own words followed by an inline citation, or by quoting or closely paraphrasing the source, usually with in-text attribution (adding the author's name to the text) and an inline citation. The following examples are adapted from "What Constitutes Plagiarism?", Harvard Guide to Using Sources, Harvard University:

Respecting copyright
Regardless of plagiarism concerns, works under copyright that are not available under a compatible free license must comply with the copyright policy and the non-free content guideline. This means they cannot be extensively copied into Wikipedia articles. Limited amounts of text can be quoted or closely paraphrased from nonfree sources if such text is clearly indicated in the article as being the words of someone else; this can be accomplished by providing an in-text attribution, and quotation marks or block quotations as appropriate, followed by an inline citation.

Translating
If the source is in a language other than English, the contributor may be under the mistaken belief that the act of translation is a sufficient revision to eliminate concerns of plagiarism. On the contrary, regardless of whether the work is free, the obligation remains to give credit to authors of foreign language texts for their creative expression, information and ideas, and, if the work is unfree, direct translation is likely to be a copyright violation as well.

What is not plagiarism
Charles Lipson states that all plagiarism rules "follow from the same idea: acknowledge what you take from others. The only exception is when you rely on commonly known information." Plagiarism is less a concern where the content both lacks creativity and where the facts and ideas being offered are common knowledge. Here are some examples where in-text attribution is generally not required, though you may still need to add an inline citation:

 * use of common expressions and idioms, including those that are common in sub-cultures such as academia;
 * phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information; sentences such as "John Smith was born on 2 February 1900" lack sufficient creativity to require attribution.
 * simple, non-creative lists of information that are common knowledge. If the list is drawn from another source (i.e., it is not common knowledge), or if creativity has gone into producing a list by selecting which facts are included, or in which order they are listed, then reproducing the list without citing its source may constitute plagiarism.
 * mathematical and scientific formulae that are part of the most basic and general background knowledge of a field, E = mc2 and F = ma (where, even in these cases, for deeper reader understanding, a citation may be best practice);
 * simple logical deductions.

Copyright violations
If you find duplicated text or media, consider first whether the primary problem is plagiarism or copyright infringement. If the source is not in the public domain or licensed compatibly with Wikipedia, or if you suspect that it is not, you should address it under the copyright policies.

How to find text plagiarism
There are several methods to detect plagiarism: plagiarized text often demonstrates a sudden change from an editor's usual style and tone and may appear more advanced in grammar and vocabulary. Plagiarized material may contain unexplained acronyms or technical jargon that has been described in an earlier part of the plagiarized document. Because plagiarized material was written for other purposes, it is often un-encyclopedic in tone. An editor who plagiarizes multiple sources will appear to frequently and abruptly change writing styles.

An easy way to test for plagiarism of online sources is to copy and paste passages into a search engine. Exact matches, or near matches, may be plagiarism. When running such tests, be aware that other websites reuse content from Wikipedia. A list of identified websites which do so is maintained at Mirrors and forks. It is usually possible to find the exact version in article history from which a mirror copy was made. Conversely, if the text in question was added in one large edit, and the text closely matches the external source, this is an indication of direct copying. When in doubt, double check search engine results with an experienced Wikipedian.

Another option is to utilize a plagiarism detector, such as those found at Category:Plagiarism detectors. Plagiarism detection systems, some of which are freely available online, exist primarily to help detect academic fraud. Wikipedia does not endorse, or recommend, any external services, so your own experience will be the guide.

It can also be useful to perform a direct comparison between cited sources and text within the article to see if text has been plagiarized, including too-close paraphrasing of the original. Here it should be borne in mind that an occasional sentence in an article that bears a recognizable similarity to a sentence in a cited source is not generally a cause for concern. Some facts and opinions can only be expressed in so many ways and still be the same fact or opinion. A plagiarism concern arises when there is evidence of systematic copying of the diction of one or more sources across multiple sentences or paragraphs. In addition, when dealing with non-free sources, be sure that any appropriated creative expressions are marked as quotations.

Addressing the involved editor
If you find an example of plagiarism where an editor has copied text, media, or figures into Wikipedia without proper attribution, contact the editor responsible, point them to this guideline, and ask them to add attribution. Attribution errors may be inadvertent, so intentional plagiarism should not be presumed in the absence of strong evidence. Start with the assumption of good faith; contributors may not be familiar with the concept of plagiarism. It may be helpful to refer them to Verifiability, Citing sources, and/or Help:Citations quick reference. Editors who have difficulties or questions about this guidance can be referred to the Help Desk or media copyright questions.

As well as requesting repair of the example you found, you may wish to invite the editor to identify and repair any other instances of plagiarism they may have placed before becoming familiar with this guideline. If an editor persists in plagiarizing, report the editor to the administrators' noticeboard. Be sure to include diffs that show both the plagiarism and the warnings.

It may not always be feasible to contact the contributor. For example, an editor who placed text three years ago and has not edited since is unlikely to be available to respond to the concerns that are raised. Moreover, while discovery of plagiarism can be rapid and inescapable—e.g., one visits a manufacturer's history page, then on turning to Wikipedia, finds manufacturer's verbatim text content appearing in the History section of the company's Wikipedia article—the process of correcting the text may be outside of the skill set of the individual discovering it, and so cannot take place immediately. Even if within the skill set, it may not be rapidly achievable by the discovering editor (e.g., if the process requires identifying alternative content or sources).

Repairing text plagiarism
As such, whether or not one is able to contact the responsible earlier editor, the process of correcting Wikipedia content will lie to greater or lessor extent with editors currently visiting and actively involved with the article in question. Material that is plagiarized but does not violate copyright need not to be removed from Wikipedia, if its repair is possible. But it must be repaired, and until the repair is achieved, editors have the responsibility of identifying violating text, and alerting readers that the text is not in compliance with core Wikipedia policies and guidelines.

To repair plagiarism, an incoming editor can: Regardless of the specific approach among these used, until the repair is complete, information regarding the source article or file page must appear, and the sentence, section, or article containing substantial plagiarised content much be labeled with a template message (tag). Alternatively, and more radically, the unsourced material can be moved to the article's Talk page until its full repair can be accomplished.
 * edit the content to define the limits of the plagiarism (by adding quotation marks, or markup ), and then attributing the content to the identified source;
 * identify an additional source or sources relevant to the text content in question, then edit the content, paraphrasing per Wikipedia guidelines, so that it is fully consistent with the original and added sources.

How to find media plagiarism
This can begin with a commonsense question: Does it seem likely that the uploader is the original source? The person who scans an image from an 1825 textbook on herbs is unlikely to be the author, even if they have claimed PD-self. Sometimes doubts may be triggered by the professional quality of media, or by the exclusivity. If you suspect plagiarism, try to locate the original source through an online search engine such as Google Image Search. Other factors to consider include the editing history of the uploader and, with images, image metadata, such as Exif and XMP.

Frequently, a person who uploads and claims credit for another's image will leave the original image metadata, or a visible or invisible digital watermark, in place. If the author information conveyed by the metadata, or watermark, contradicts the author information on the image description page, this is a sign the image requires investigation. A user's original photographs can also be expected to have similar metadata, since most people own a small number of cameras; varied metadata is suspicious. Suspicions based on metadata should be checked with other editors experienced with images and other media.

Source and licensing information
For images and other media, the correct source and licensing information must be supplied, otherwise the files run the risk of deletion. Never use PD-self, GFDL-self or self if the image is not yours. If the source requests a credit line, e.g. "NASA/JPL/MSSS", place one in the author field of information.

Copying material from free sources
The guidance in this section must not be read in isolation. Inline citations to a source are still required as described in the Verifiability policy and added to an article as explained in the guideline citing sources. Attribution as described in this section is an addition to those requirements.

Attribution templates
For public-domain sources, using citation-attribution, source-attribution, or a similar attribution template is acceptable to acknowledge the work of others and still allow subsequent modification. See the next section for more on using attribution templates with compatibly licensed sources; the proper template may vary by the license of the source.

Compatibly licensed sources
If the external work is under a copyleft license that removes some restrictions on distributing copies and making modified versions of a work, it may be acceptable to include the text directly into a Wikipedia article, provided that the license is compatible with the CC BY-SA and the terms of the license are met. (A partial table of license compatibility can be found at the Copyright FAQ). Most compatible licenses require that author attribution be given, and even if the license does not, the material must be attributed to avoid plagiarism. Attribution for compatibly licensed text can be provided through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page (see the section Where to place attribution).

Templates for compatibly licensed sources include:
 * Dual: for content imported from a source that may be reused under both CC-By-SA 3.0 and GFDL
 * CCBYSASource: for content imported from a source compatible for reuse under CC-By-SA 3.0 but not GFDL
 * CC-notice: for content imported from a source compatible for reuse under CC-By-SA 3.0 but not GFDL

Care must be taken to check that what appears to be a compatible licence is indeed compatible. Some websites allow text to be copied for educational or non-commercial use. Such text is not compatible with the Wikipedia licences because the text must be free to be used and distributed commercially.

Public-domain sources
Whether it is copyright-expired or public domain for other reasons, material from public-domain sources is welcome on Wikipedia, but such material must be properly attributed. Public-domain attribution notices should not be removed from an article or simply replaced with inline citations unless it is verified that substantially all of the source's phrasing has been removed from the article (see ). Of course, citable information should not be left without cites, although the most appropriate citations should be used.

A public domain source may be summarized and cited in the same manner as for copyrighted material, but the source's text can also be copied verbatim into a Wikipedia article. If text is copied or closely paraphrased from a free source, it must be cited and attributed through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or similar annotation, which is usually placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page (see the section "Where to place attribution" for more details).

If the external work is in the public domain, but it contains an original idea or is a primary source, then it may be necessary to alter the wording of the text (for example, not including all the text from the original work, or quoting some sections, or specifically attributing to a specific source an opinion included in the text) to meet the Wikipedia content policies of neutral point of view and No original research (in particular the restrictions on the use of primary sources).

Avoiding plagiarism requires attribution, and this is best accomplished when a reader can easily compare the Wikipedia article to the source. Many public domain sources are online, and attribution can (and should) include hyperlink. When there is no online source, the editor should consider creating an exact copy of the source at Wikisource. The editor should also consider this if the online source is not available on a stable site or is in a form (e.g., a photocopied book) that is not readily convertible into simple text. This may be appropriate even when the source appears to be at a stable site and in an acceptable form, because the Wikisource site is under control of the Wikimedia foundation and other sites are not.

Copying within Wikipedia
Wikipedia's content is dual-licensed under both the GFDL and CC BY-SA license models. Contributors continue to own copyright to their contributions, but they liberally license their contributions for reuse and modification. GFDL and CC BY-SA do require attribution. However, since Wikipedia's articles do not contain bylines, it is not necessary or appropriate to provide attribution on the article's face. As long as the licensing requirements for attribution are met (see the guideline for specifics), copying content (including text, images, and citations) from one Wikipedia article to another or from one language Wikipedia to another is not plagiarism as long as attribution is provided via the edit summaries.

Where to place attribution
If a Wikipedia article is constructed through summarizing reliable sources, but there is a paragraph or a few sentences copied from compatibly licensed or public-domain text which is not placed within quotations, then putting an attribution template in a footnote at the end of the sentences or paragraph is sufficient. To aid with attribution at the end of a few sentences, consider using a general attribution template such as the citation-attribution template for public-domain sources or CC-notice for compatibly licensed sources, Free-content attribution which is designed around material with an externally posted license, or use a source-specific attribution template such as DNB. Directions for usage are provided on the template pages.

If a significant proportion of the text is copied or closely paraphrased from a compatibly-licensed or public domain souce, attribution is generally provided either through the use of an appropriate attribution template, or a general attribution template such as source-attribution, or similar annotation, placed in a "References section" near the bottom of the page. In such cases consider adding the attribution statements at the end of the Reference section directly under a line consisting of "Attribution:" in bold:

See, for example, Western Allied invasion of Germany and the Battle of Camp Hill.

A practice preferred by some Wikipedia editors when copying material from public domain or compatibly-licensed sources is to paste the content in one edit and indicate in the edit summary of the source of the material. If following this practice, immediately follow up with proper attribution in the article so that the new material cannot be mistaken for your own wording.

To provide proper attribution when copying verbatim from a public domain or compatibly-licensed source, you can either:
 * Put the whole text of the source (if small enough) in quotation marks or blockquotes, followed by an inline citation; or
 * For sections or whole articles, add a section-wide or article-wide attribution template; if the text taken does not form the entire article, specifically mention the section requiring attribution; or
 * In a way unambiguously indicating exactly what has been copied verbatim, provide an inline citation and/or add your own note in the reference section of the article.

For an example of the last, see the references section in planetary nomenclature, which uses a large amount of text from the Gazetteer of Planetary Nomenclature.

This practice has some advantages—for example, further changes such as modernizing language and correcting errors can be done in separate edits after the original insertion of text, allowing later editors the ability to make a clear comparison between the original source text and the current version in the article.

Tools
There are several tools available to help identify plagiarism on Wikipedia:
 * CopyPatrol – lists pages with suspected plagiarism for manual review
 * Earwig's Copyvio Detector – check any article for plagiarism, but keep in mind WP:NOTEARWIG.
 * User:CorenSearchBot (deactivated) – automatically patrolled newly created pages for plagiarism and tagged them

title: Wikipedia:Plagiarism


text:
Christopher Dresser

Christopher Dresser (4 July 1834 – 24 November 1904) was a British designer and design theorist, now widely known as one of the first and most important independent designers. He was a pivotal figure in the Aesthetic Movement and a major contributor to the allied Anglo-Japanese or Modern Style (British Art Nouveau style), both of which originated in England and had long-lasting international influence.

Biography
Dresser was born in Glasgow, Scotland, of a Yorkshire family. At age 13, he began attending the Government School of Design, Somerset House, London.

From this early date his design work widened to include carpets, ceramics, furniture, glass, graphics, metalwork, including silver and electroplate, and textiles printed and woven. He claimed to have designed "as much as any man" at the International Exhibition London 1862. As early as 1865 the Building News reported that in the early part of his career he had been active as a designer of wallpapers, textiles and carpets, and the most active revolutioniser in the decorative art of the day. He wrote several books on design and ornament, including The Art of Decorative Design (1862), The Development of Ornamental Art in the International Exhibition (1862), and Principles of Design (1873), which was addressed in the preface to "working men". In 1899 The Studio magazine found it was possible to quote this book "page after page and not find a line, scarcely a word, that would not be endorsed by the most critical member of the Arts and Crafts Association today." In effect Dresser set the agenda adopted by the Arts and Crafts movement at a later date.

In 1873 he was requested by the American Government to write a report on the design of household goods.

En route for Japan in 1876 he delivered a series of three lectures in the Philadelphia Museum and School of Industrial Art and supervised the manufacture of wallpapers to his design for Wilson Fennimore. He was commissioned by Messrs Tiffany of New York to form a collection, whilst in Japan, of art objects both old and new that should illustrate the manufactures of that country.

In 1876, the British Government appointed Dresser as an emissary to Japan and sent him to visit Japan after he became associated with Japanese art in 1862, and made a number of Japanese business associates such as Kiritsu Kosho Kaisha, in the years following. In four months in 1876–1877 Dresser travelled about 2000 miles in Japan, recording his impressions in Japan, its Architecture, Art and Art-Manufactures. He represented the South Kensington Museum whilst in Japan, and was received at court by the Emperor, who ordered Dresser to be treated as a guest of the nation – all doors were open to him. He was requested by the Japanese Government to write a report on 'Trade with Europe'. His pioneering study of Japanese art is evident in much of his work which is considered typical of the Anglo-Japanese style.

From 1879 to 1882 Dresser was in partnership with Charles Holme (1848–1923) as Dresser & Holme, wholesale importers of Oriental goods, with a warehouse at 7 Farringdon Road, London. Between 1879 and 1882, as Art Superintendent at the Linthorpe Art Pottery in Linthorpe in Middlesbrough he designed over 1,000 pots. If his ceramic work from the 1860s onwards (for firms such as Mintons, Wedgwood, Royal Worcester, Watcombe, Linthorpe, Old Hall at Hanley and Ault) is considered, he must be amongst the most influential ceramic designers of any period. Much of his other work remains to be identified, although wallpaper designs for American, and textiles for French and German manufacturers have recently been located. A significant Dresser collection is held by the Dorman Museum in Middlesbrough. A Heritage Lottery Funded project draws attention to this.

Some of Dresser’s metalwork designs are still in production, such as his oil and vinegar sets and toast rack designs, now manufactured by Alessi. Alberto Alessi goes so far as to say Dresser 'knew the techniques of metal production better than any designer who has come to Alessi'.

One of his Old Hall designs is thought to have inspired Alan Garner's 1967 novel The Owl Service.

Dresser died in Mulhouse in 1904, during a business trip in which he intended to sell designs to local industries.

Gallery
File:Toast Rack (England), designed 1881 (CH 18804417).jpg|Toast Rack (1881) File:Pitcher MET DP-13486-092.jpg|Pitcher (c. 1881) File:Bottle vase MET DP-1687-028 (cropped).jpg|Bottle vase for Linthorpe Art Pottery (c. 1882) File:Soup Tureen and Ladle LACMA M.2000.89.1a-c.jpg|Soup tureen and ladle (1888) File:Pitcher MET DP-13486-061.jpg|Pitcher File:Dish LACMA AC1999.182.3.jpg|Glass dish for Couper & Sons

Partial bibliography

 * Development of Ornamental Art in the International Exhibition (1862)
 * General Principles of Art, Decorative and Pictorial, with hints on colour, its harmonies and contrasts (1868)
 * Principles of Decorative Design (1873)
 * Studies in Design (1875)
 * Japan, its Architecture, Art and Art-Manufactures (1882)
 * Modern Ornamentation (1886)
 * Principles of Decorative Design (1873)
 * Studies in Design (1875)
 * Japan, its Architecture, Art and Art-Manufactures (1882)
 * Modern Ornamentation (1886)

title: Christopher Dresser


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Pastorrussell

In order to remain listed at Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute, not different disputes. The persons complaining must provide evidence of their efforts, and each of them must certify it by signing this page with ~. If this does not happen within 48 hours of the creation of this dispute page (which was: {insert UTC timestamp with }), the page will be deleted. The current date and time is:, 29 July 2024 (UTC).

 * (Example user | talk | contributions)

Statement of the dispute
''This is a summary written by users who dispute this user's conduct. Users signing other sections should not edit here.''

This Request for Comments is about the behavior of user in editing the article on Charles Taze Russell: primarily POV pushing, and breach of Wikipedia guidelines to that end.

Description
''{Add summary here, but you must use the section below to certify or endorse it. Users who edit or endorse this summary should not edit the other summaries.}''

Charles Taze Russell was a 19th century minister. The article, as currently written, appears to several Wikipedians to be non-neutral. Pastorrussell is a member of the Bible Students, a religious group following and promoting Russell's teachings, and his edits attempt to keep the Wikipedia article closely based on the biographical page at his own website Pastor-Russell.com.

After previous collaborative editing, this version appeared in May 2005, first via an anonymous editor 65.28.248.240 and then explicitly via Pastorrussell ( "Pastorrussell (Bio (c) 2005 ... Suggest changes at: webmaster@pastor-russell.com").

Since then, edits by other editors have been persistently reverted except for trivial paraphrasing and Wikification. Pastorrussell has asserted that he and his religious group, the Bible Students, have control of the article because they have a unique factual insight into the subject due to access to primary sources. This stance makes it impossible to make relevant edits that significantly alter the article: for instance, to include alternative views, religious or secular, of his life and actions (as required by NPOV).

Despite this claim to sources, he fails to cite them.

An NPOV banner has been put up on the article five times within a 24-hour period and removed each time.

At 05:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC), after ignoring an admin warning, he was blocked for 24 hours for breach of the Three Revert rule.

Evidence of disputed behavior
(provide diffs and links)

Ownership of article and editing conduct
 * See the History of Charles Taze Russell for evidence that an NPOV tag was added and removed five times in the 24-hours period from 1200 GMT 19 July 2005 to 1200 GMT 20 July 2005. Continuing deletion of NPOV tag even after RfC in progress:    22:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 * See Talk:Charles Taze Russell/archive1 for the statement
 * "Bible Students are in charge of this article, and are happy to discuss and view information about historical facts, or the addition of other events in Pastor Russell's life".

 * See response to K.'s notice about editing behaviour and Wikipedia being a collaborative medium:
 * "Since it is collaborative, any factual errors will be cleaned up by Bible Students who ARE in charge of Pastor Russell's life and legacy since we are the only ones who have a direct linkage to him, have all of the original historical documents, and the closest tie to him. I am willing to work with you, but your stubborn attitude results in an equally stubborn response as we are defending the truth of Pastor Russell's life, ministry, and character".

 * Attempting to get the page permanently protected in his preferred version
 * There is a problem with an 'edit war' on this page. The group most closely associated with Charles Taze Russell's Last Will & Testament, and documented legacy, have had factual data removed from the article in favor of groups who have no association with him. A permanent protection is requested to maintain the integrity of the Wikipedia entry, and to prevent accurate material being removed, and innacurate material being added, etc... Thank you.

 * Continued assertion, at Talk:Bible Students, of ownership of article and refusal to accept the collaborative nature of Wikipedia:
 * It also concerns me that a few of you guys seem to be following me around and "correcting" everything I do under cover of making sure things are edited properly. That is neither ethical, nor moral. Oh, of course I'm not perfect, and will make mistakes, but you aren't Bible Students, and you have no respect for Pastor Russell or his ministry. If you want to 'wikify' something, fine and good, but to follow me around and hound me is quite frightening and highly improper. Leave me alone. Leave the Bible Student entry alone. Leave the Pastor Russell entry alone. Let Bible Students work on it. It's about us, not you. If you want to make an entry on anti-JWs or anti-Bible Students, go right ahead. PastorRussell 14:05, 04 August 2005 (UTC)

 * More assertion of unique ownership of article:
 * Why are just a few of you guys moving OUR history around when you have no connection to it? PastorRussell 16:55, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

 * And more (including personal attack):
 * ''Your conduct is beyond unacceptable. Your rewording and reworking of sections is appalling ... This article doesn't belong to you. You have no connections to Pastor Russell or Bible Students. You know very little of our history, and have presented it in very unclear ways. If you do not stop this ridiculous behavior I will immediately report you to the administrators of Wikipedia, who have already told me in email that they support my efforts to keep this article free of your form of bias, and the fact you aren't even a Bible Student and are attempting to write our history. PastorRussell 16:49, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Legal threat
 * See Talk:Charles Taze Russell/archive1 for the statement: "If you are choosing to not work together, and if you push the matter, then we will work without you, and defend the truth, even to the point of using the courts and television, if necessary, because we have original source documents backing up the truth".

Failure to cite sources

 * Self-evident from the article: a lengthy biography whose language strongly indicates uncredited archaic source(s) (e.g. "...when he was but seven-years-old ...") . sourcing improving 01:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

NPOV
 * General likelihood of POV when material comes from a partisan religious site.
 * The introduction's  failure to mention that Russell's organisation is generally considered, outside the Bible Students, to be the precursor to the Jehovah's Witnesses.
 * The extremely vague description of Russell's divorce ("This arrangement eventually fell apart, causing Charles great distress, and became grist for the mill to many of his critics" ) - in reality a well-documented and acrimonious court case involving allegations of sexual misconduct.
 * Claim (see Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute below) that credible reference sources are invalid due to bias in favour of the Jehovah's Witnesses.

Original research and verifiability
 * Use of content sourced from Pastor-Russell.com, Pastorrussell's own articles whose source is neither provided nor verifiable . see sourcing 01:30, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Applicable policies

 * Neutral point of view

 * Three-revert rule

 * Ownership of articles

 * No legal threats

 * Cite sources

 * Original research

 * Verifiability

Evidence of trying and failing to resolve the dispute
As Talk:Charles Taze Russell/archive1 shows, several users have asked the user in question to stop removing the NPOV banner. There has been a suggestion that a vote be taken.

The talk shows that the user in question, while saying that discussion is the way to resolve disputes and claiming to desire a compromise, nevertheless makes clear that any such compromise must be based on other editors' acceptance of the accuracy and NPOV nature of his version .

He repeatedly dismisses specific questions as minor, fails to Cite sources, and will not agree that there is a POV issue.
 * "I, and other Bible Students, are monitoring this article, and will stand by it as it stands now, but are willing to discuss possible changes of certain sentences and paragraphs, but not the entire article, which is 100% accurate, neutral, and historically factual"

On User talk:Pastorrussell, K. has asked him to stop removing the NPOV tag and to discuss the situation, and Tearlach urged him to read the NPOV guidelines. Currently (13:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)) there has been no response.

In response to the RfC, discussion is ongoing (21:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC)) at Talk:Charles Taze Russell/archive1 with uncertain tone. Pastorrussell has expressed an interest in compromise and discussion, but his commitment to NPOV looks questionable as he views credible sources by Wikipedia standards - the Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia, 6th ed., Britannica Concise Encyclopedia, 2005 and The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church - as biased
 * "All of them written by Jehovah's Witnesses of the Editorial Committee. As a result, they are biased. Please research the matter further and you will see that encyclopedia references are wrong to use here, and do not apply"".

He is also continuing to delete the NPOV tag   with a unilateral claim that "All NPOV issues have been fixed".

Multiple reverts in five hours time      with the claim that "NPOV issues have been & are being resolved " on 22 July 2005 (not a basis for removing a NPOV tag).

One of the authors of this RfC has advised the user in question that, if he thinks the majority are being unreasonable, he should request mediation. There has been no response from the user in question.

Users certifying the basis for this dispute
(sign with ~ )
 * Robert McClenon 12:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * K. 12:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Tearlach 12:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Flammifer 03:09, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Other users who endorse this summary
(sign with ~ )
 * 1) JCarriker 12:26, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Stirling Newberry 18:03, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) Carnildo 21:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Flammifer 09:57, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Thryduulf 20:21, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Response
This is a summary written by the user whose conduct is disputed, or by other users who think that the dispute is unjustified and that the above summary is biased or incomplete.

It is important that a neutral and unbiased article reflecting on the life, ministry, and legacy of Pastor Russell be created, and maintained. Any edits reverted by me have been edits harmful to the facts, and not simply to the article itself as it now reads. There have been a dozen efforts to remove all forms of POV from the article, but others keep insisting on adding additional material that has nothing to do with Pastor Russell, or connecting him with the Jehovah's Witnesses. Although they claim him as their founder, he was merely the founder of the Watch Tower Bible & Tract Society, and not the current religious movement. Thus, to connect him with the JWs, or make it appear that they are one and the same goes contrary to historical fact. To connect him with the JWs would be a non-neutral POV, which everyone seems to be talking about. I am anxious to work with everyone, and have said that from the start. Many have been hostile to these attempts, and have made edits which are highly inappropriate to the facts, or again, biased towards the JWs. It is my desire the article reflect a fair, balanced, neutral, and factually correct record of the life of Charles Taze Russell, not the JWs or Bible Students, or any other group.

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):

Outside view by Stirling Newberry
This is a summary written by users not directly involved with the dispute but who would like to add an outside view of the dispute.

Having reviewed the pages, all I can say is that the editors dealing with this problem have shown incredible patience. Pastorrussell has continually violated the 3RR, unilaterally declared NPOV problems have been fixed, when, in fact, all he has done is revert to his preferred version, and has made declarations of special, uncitable, knowledge. Currently he is blocked because of a 3RR violation. His behavior is almost a paragon of the phrase "Pove troll" (see Talk - Tearlach 15:33, 24 July 2005 (UTC)) in that he has not merely attempted to enforce his POV, but has made statements which seem almost calculated to provoke, or at the very least are made without regard for civility and collegiality.

Several editors have repeatedly attempted to bring the page to consensus, and work within the discussion process, and each time Pastorrussel has refused in terms which are both high handed and arbitrary.

The present situation is intolerable, and the recommendations from the editors involved indealing with Pastorrussel should be taken, and acted on upon quickly with the support of the community. We should not be allowing individual abusive editors to waste the time of so many valuable contributors for as long as this edit war has dragged on. Stirling Newberry 06:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):
 * 1) Robert McClenon 14:58, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Husnock 22:13, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) DavidH 05:56, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Outside view by Gamaliel
It seems fairly clear that User:Pastorrussell is a POV warrior and is convinced that everyone else is filled with bias. I have no knowledge of the content of this article and had never even heard of Russell until two days ago, but when I blocked Pastorrussell for his second 3RR violation (after letting him slide for the first violation with a warning despite a whopping 14 reverts) he accused me of being biased against his POV. Until Pastorrussell is capable of writing in an NPOV manner and learns to play nicely with other editors, I don't think he should be editing this article. Users who endorse this summary (sign with ~ ):
 * 1) Gamaliel 22:56, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 2) Robert McClenon 23:13, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 3) DavidH 05:56, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Discussion
All signed comments and talk not related to a vote or endorsement, should be directed to this page's discussion page.


text:
Help (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

"Help" is the fourth episode of the seventh and final season of the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The episode aired on October 15, 2002 on UPN and its plot is based on the story of the Trojan priestess Cassandra from the Greek mythology.

Plot
Patrolling at night at a funeral home, Buffy, Xander and Dawn discuss Buffy's nervousness about her new job and the struggle she may face while trying to balance her Slayer job with her duties as a school counselor. At the high school the next day, Buffy talks with various students who all have their own problems, including trouble with bullies and violence, anxiety, homosexuality and plain boredom. Willow and Xander walk together and talk about Buffy's struggles and Willow's worries about her role in dealing with the impending Hellmouth danger. With Xander's support, Willow visits Tara's grave.

Buffy talks with more students, including her own sister, but one girl, Cassie Newton, stuns Buffy when she declares that she (Cassie) will die the following Friday and that the circumstances around her unwanted death will include "lots of coins. Weird ones." As she leaves for class, Cassie compliments Buffy's shirt and warns her against spilling something on it. Buffy reports Cassie to Principal Wood, but he has little help to offer. After spilling coffee onto her white shirt, Buffy is apprehensive and sends Dawn to befriend Cassie. The two girls talk about Cassie's friend Mike, who has continuously asked Cassie to an upcoming winter formal dance and been rejected every time.

Willow investigates Cassie on the computer, and finds Cassie's website filled with sad, morbid poetry. Though Buffy is convinced that Cassie has a precognitive ability and given up hope for survival, Xander and Willow are both skeptical, despite all the experiences they've had with the paranormal. Dawn returns home from school and tells them, "I'm liking Mike Helgenberg for the perp. Let's collar him before he lawyers up," but Buffy and the others do not pay much attention. Willow finds a website on Cassie's father that shows his troubled past with the law and alcohol. Buffy and Xander visit Cassie's father and confront him with their suspicion that he may get drunk and hurt his daughter. Mr. Newton denies the accusation and reveals that his ex-wife only allows him to spend one weekend a month with his daughter. Buffy then finds out that Mr. Newton's weekend with Cassie was the previous one, therefore not only does he not have the chance to hurt Cassie, but if Cassie's prediction is true, then he will not see her again before her death. Satisfied that Mr. Newton is not involved, Buffy and Xander leave and bump into Cassie. She had been waiting for them outside of her father's house, and although she appreciates Buffy's efforts to find the cause, she knows there is nothing Buffy can do. Xander asks her if she is planning to kill herself, but Cassie denies it. Though she admits that she does not want to die, she cannot prevent her own demise.

Meanwhile, a group of guys in red cloaks walk around a circle and burn pictures of Cassie on a tray in the middle. Still motivated to help Cassie, Buffy reads poetry from Cassie's site and continues to investigate with the rest of the gang despite Xander and Willow's skepticism, and Dawn becomes close with Cassie and Mike. Buffy goes to the school basement and asks a still-insane Spike if he knows anything about Cassie. He does not. As Buffy turns to leave, Spike asks her to stay, she refuses, worried that her presence will worsen his condition.

Upstairs, Wood and another administrator search through student lockers for anything suspicious. Buffy catches Mike in the halls and stops him to see if he may have intentions of hurting Cassie because she rejected him. He makes it clear he does not mind, and is thinking about asking Dawn to the dance instead. Coins fall from one of the lockers, drawing Buffy's attention. Buffy takes one of the coins and the number of the locker where they came from and talks to the student the locker belongs to. The student confesses that some of his friends want to hurt Cassie. Dawn and Cassie walk away from the school as Cassie reveals how she knows Buffy sent Dawn to befriend Cassie, but appreciates the genuine friendship she made with Dawn. Just then a student named Peter approaches, and Cassie, knowing she will not see Dawn again, tells Dawn that nothing that is about to happen is her fault. Peter asks Dawn about the dance, but not to ask her to go with him. When an irritated Dawn turns back toward Cassie, she is gone.

At the school that night, the cloaked group gathers again around a circle of coins and one of the boys reveals himself to be Peter. He checks with the others to make sure the school is secure and that no one can get in or out. Then, he pulls a bound, blindfolded, and gagged Cassie out to the circle and holds a meat cleaver to her neck. She is to be sacrificed to a demon that will provide the boys with "infinite riches". As Peter starts the ritual, Buffy reveals herself as one of the cloaked people, who is only there to prove the ritual is fake, but a large demon appears behind her; proving her wrong. Buffy fights the demon and Spike shows up with a flaming torch to help, having temporarily regained his sanity. Buffy uses the torch to burn the demon while Spike cuts Cassie free from her bonds. After he rips her gag off, Cassie says that Buffy will one day tell him how she feels about him. Desperately, Peter drags himself toward the fried demon, demanding his money. The burned demon leans up and bites Peter on the shoulder once before exploding into dust. As Buffy and Cassie walk away together, a crossbow booby trap set by one of the cloaked boys nearly kills Cassie, but Buffy stops the bolt. Buffy tells Cassie that one person can make a difference, to which Cassie says Buffy will make a difference, before gasping and falling to the ground, dead.

The next day, the Scooby Gang solemnly talks about how Cassie died because of a congenital heart defect. She was always going to die, no matter what happened, and Cassie knew that Buffy would be at her side when her prediction came true. Buffy feels that she has failed, but a devastated Dawn corrects her, saying Buffy did not fail since she tried to save Cassie; it was because of her that Dawn and Cassie were friends. The gang are now convinced as Buffy of Cassie's unique gift; they all sadly realize that even though they may be able to avert outcomes, they cannot change fate.

Reception
In 2023, Rolling Stone ranked this episode as #73 out of the 144 episodes in honor of the 20th anniversary of the show's ending. It has a higher rating than the similar "Reptile Boy," which ranked #139. The author of the list commented, "An episode centered around a high school student, a wacky cult of demon worshippers wanting to get rich, and Buffy swooping in to save the day. Color me Season One. The difference being that this isn't Season One anymore, and the show has evolved drastically, with Buffy thwarting the cult but losing Cassie afterward. The Scoobies are adults now, and they know the good guys don't always win." In their own list, Vox ranked this episode at #90 out of the 144, calling it "one of the most solid of season seven's high school–themed episodes... a nice, moody revisiting of the themes that early Buffy explored so well."

title: Help (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)


text:
Talk:Help (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Untitled
Please help complete the Angel/Buffy episode articles. See what needs to be done on this sub-page of WikiProject Buffy:

WikiProject Buffy/Episodes

Also please help update any major changes made to episode articles on that page so that progress can be mapped.

________________________________________________________

"Commonly believed to be the best episode of Buffy among fans." What? I've taken that out, because, quite frankly, I just don't believe it. My opinions toward Help notwithstanding, I can find no evidence that Help is held that highly by fans. It's a well regarded episode. Perhaps it could be "one of the best episodes of Buffy" or "the best episode of Buffy Season Seven." Can anyone cite something that would establish that some large portion of the fanbase considers Help the pinnacle of Buffy? Alpha5099 03:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Body count
The section under arc significance originally said that Cassie and Joyce were the only two deaths by natural causes. I've added Tara since she died of a gun shot wound, which is a natural cause. They even make a point about it since Willow can't revive Tara since she died of natural causes. Along the same vein, shouldn't Katrina be included? She died when her head was slamed into the stairs - magic had nothing to do with her death even though she was under a spell earlier. Koweja 22:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Buffy704.jpg
Image:Buffy704.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 19:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Help (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)


text:
WVUR-FM

WVUR-FM, The Source 95 is the student-run college radio station of Valparaiso University in Valparaiso, Indiana. It broadcasts at 95.1 MHz FM and streams online at WVUR's website. The station features a range of students, staff, members of the public, and faculty members who contribute to the station. Each semester some students participate with The Source on a regular basis, making it one of the largest organizations on campus. The Source plays a wide variety of music including rock, alternative, jazz, punk, and indie. Many students have specialty shows in which they play their own mix in addition to the regular automated rotation. WVUR Sports is an integral part of the station. Hundreds of VU Athletics games are broadcast each year on the air and online. The Evening Source also exists, providing the area with news at five pm.

Programming and promotion
The Source 95 is an entirely student-operated variety station. Its primary programming is music, which includes a standard rotation based on a combination of standard alternative fare and the CMJ Top 200/Indie/College Radio format, other genre-specific shows, and free-form shows during evenings and weekends. The station also includes talk with The Morning Show and news and weather with periodic updates throughout all programming, as well as The Evening Source news show. Programming also includes more than 100 sports broadcasts per year. WVUR Sports broadcasts Valparaiso University sporting events live on the air and on the WVUR online webcast.

Awards
The station won Indiana Association of Student Broadcasters awards in recent years, including Radio School of the Year in 2006, 2008, and 2010.

Development
In May 1949, a group of students submitted a proposal to the Valparaiso University Board of Directors to build an educational FM radio station in the basement of Guild Hall. However, after ten years without progress, VU law school student Jack Lawson led a committee to plan a radio station. With the help of DePauw University radio station WGRE, the committee obtained information necessary to found a radio station. After experimenting in November 1959 with a closed-circuit station nicknamed WPRX reaching only Wehrenberg Hall, President O. P. Kretzmann addressed the student body at 11 p.m. on November 11, 1960, on 600 AM. The low-power station broadcast out of Benton Hall and reached all but one dormitory. WVUR's first six years included transmission via telephone cables, and in 1966 WVUR became the first FM station in the city of Valparaiso, operating on frequency 89.5.

FM Radio
Permission was granted in February 1961 to construct a non-commercial educational FM station. Due to legal concerns, the station was turned over from the students to the administration. Though this move sparked heavy opposition, the transition began during the 1965–1966 academic year. On September 25, 1966, the FCC granted a license to WVUR-FM 89.5 MHz The Voice, making it the first radio station in the city of Valparaiso. The studio was still located in Benton Hall and included a new lounge nicknamed The Penthouse. The studios relocated to Heimlich Hall during the 1970–1971 academic year and moved again to the Journalism Center on January 11, 1978. On September 24, 1982, a new tower was constructed atop Brandt Hall, which brought increased wattage and the station's current frequency and name: WVUR 95.1 FM The Source.

Modernization
In August 1998, WVUR relocated to Schnabel Hall. In 1999, the station began web streaming sporting events. During the 2001–2002 academic year, the station upgraded to a computer automated system and commenced broadcasting 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, including during all academic breaks. The station also began taking requests by phone. In 2017 the station removed its on-air phone and thus stopped taking requests by phone.

In 2006, WVUR began posting podcasts, media from concerts, and assorted other media such as station-made remixes on its website. On January 16, 2007, the station added a modern rock/alternative format to complement the current CMJ Indie rotation. Fall Out Boy's This Ain't a Scene, It's an Arms Race was the first official song to play in the new format.

In 2012, WVUR started to stream its full broadcast online 24/7, expanding the sports-only stream to include music, talk, and all other programming. The Source officially began full streaming at 9:51 a.m. on May 2, 2012. The first song officially played both on the air and online in this new era was Foster The People's Don't Stop (Color on the Walls).

In 2015, new general manager Andrew Whitmyer found the format insufficient for the station's needs and switched to a full mix station. In 2020, sports director Garrett Willis took up the project to get WVUR a new TieLine system for broadcasting Beacon athletics. The new system is the first that is owned by the university station.

New General Manager Zach Collins put WVUR under a partial renovation in 2021. This included updating equipment, reorganizing materials, and renovating the common area space and allocating different offices to new departments at the station. This also included an updated software update to the 24/7 playlist and reorganization of the sports department following the new TieLine equipment back in 2020. WVUR also has their first official app that can be downloaded on any Apple device from a Safari browser and can access TuneIn, give station updates, and allow students to join the station by the click of a button. The app can be found at the link here. https://www.jotform.com/app/220437252570147/

Alumni

 * Adam Amin, ESPN and national radio (sportscaster)
 * Ginger Zee ('02) ABC News Network/Good Morning America, New York, New York (Meteorologist)

title: WVUR-FM


text:
Him (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

"Him" is the sixth episode of the seventh and final season of the television series Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The episode aired on November 5, 2002 on UPN.

Plot
Xander introduces a reluctant Spike to his new living environment: Xander's apartment. Buffy tries to convince an equally reluctant Xander that Spike needs their help and a place better than the school basement to live. Buffy and Dawn talk privately about Buffy's feelings for Spike and why she is helping him in light of the pain he has caused her. Dawn starts to rant about love and relationships and Buffy leaves so she can return to work. Dawn then sees an attractive jock named R.J. on the football field and falls in love with him.

Buffy fights with and kills a demon at Anya's apartment that was sent by D'Hoffryn. Anya thanks her, but does not "want to need anyone's help." Buffy explains that the gang needs her and she wants to protect her friends. At the high school, Dawn awkwardly tries to start a conversation with R.J., who is discussing cheerleader tryouts with another player, O'Donnell, and two cheerleaders. Later, Dawn tries out for the cheerleading team wearing Buffy's old cheerleading uniform, but she falls and makes a fool of herself. At home that night, Dawn locks herself in the bathroom and cuts up the cheerleading uniform while Buffy tries to get her to come out.

Buffy tries to offer help and support, but considering Buffy's track record with guys, Dawn is not interested. The next day at school, Dawn overhears O'Donnell inform R.J. that he will not be starting quarterback for the game and she confronts O'Donnell. She yells at him at first, but then in a moment of anger, she shoves him and he falls down a flight of stairs. Dawn has a meeting with Principal Wood and Buffy about the incident and informs them that the jock just tripped and fell; Buffy realizes, though, that Dawn might have been motivated by her love for R.J. and actually pushed O'Donnell down the stairs.

R.J. catches up with Dawn after her meeting and asks her out on a date. At the Bronze, the gang sit around and talk about Spike's progress at Xander's place, then are shocked to see R.J. "getting all thrusty with some slut-bag hussy" - Dawn. Buffy confronts her sister about her clothes and behavior, but Dawn acts stubborn. Unable to get past Buffy to return to the dance floor, Dawn leaves and encounters one of the cheerleader girls in the alley. They begin to fight over R.J. and have to be broken up by Buffy.

After watching Wood lecture R.J. about not doing his own homework, Buffy attempts to lecture R.J. about the way he treats girls but, when he pulls on his jacket, she falls in love with him. Buffy catches Dawn as she returns home that night and tells her about her meeting with R.J. Buffy offers encouragement to her sister by explaining that she has a chance with R.J. and that he really likes her - though she lies, "He might have said that you came on a little strong," to keep him for herself.

At school the next day, Buffy pulls R.J. out of class and takes him to an empty room. While Dawn walks the halls searching for R.J., Buffy adoringly listens to R.J. talk about football and his troubles at school and then starts passionately kissing him just as Dawn peeks into the room. Dawn runs outside in tears and into Xander, who walks into the classroom and is surprised to find Buffy amorously on top of R.J., and he promptly takes her home for a much-needed intervention with the others. At the Summers house, that night, Buffy and Dawn fight about their love with R.J., while Xander, Willow and Anya try to keep the peace until they can reverse the love spell obviously affecting the sisters, with Xander recalling an incident he had with a backfired love spell meant for Cordelia.

Willow searches her computer for information on R.J. and instead finds information on R.J.'s older brother, Lance, whom Xander remembers from high school. Xander and Spike go to Lance's home and find that, despite his popular status at school, he is not quite his attractive, admirable self anymore. After some chatting, the guys learn that R.J.'s jacket has been handed down through the family. R.J. shows up at Buffy's house looking for her, but Willow and Anya tell him to leave. As R.J. walks away, Willow and Anya start to look at him lovingly and then argue about which of them loves him more. Buffy and Dawn jump into the contretemp, and soon Dawn is hurt and depressed that her friends and sister are taking her guy away, while the other three plot to win R.J. Buffy goes to kill Wood with her old rocket launcher, Willow works on a spell to make R.J. a woman, Anya takes off to rob a bank and Dawn lays herself across the railroad tracks.

Xander and Spike stop Willow from completing her spell and then bring her along to stop Buffy from killing Wood. Spike tackles Buffy before she can kill the principal and confiscates the weapon from her. Using Willow's locator spell, they find Dawn on the railroad tracks just as a train is headed for her. Buffy jumps in and rescues her sister just before the train hits; scared at the thought of losing her sister, Buffy shows that the spell was not that strong, and admits that she is willing to give up R.J. if it means that much to Dawn. Finally, Xander and Spike jump R.J. on the street and steal his jacket, then burn it in the fireplace at the Summers home. All the girls feel terrible about the way they acted and the things they almost did. (Buffy wryly tells Dawn, "Get ready to feel even stupider when it's not" a magic spell.) Willow questions what Anya did to prove her love to R.J.; Anya dodges the subject with a quick lie and turns off the radio as a news report is heard about a wanted bank robber on the loose.

Reception
In 2023, Vox ranked it at #107 out of the 144 episodes on their "Worst to Best" list, saying it "isn't all that great on character exploration, since half the main cast spends the episode under a mind-altering love spell, but it is enormously fun." Rolling Stone ranked the episode at #87 out of the 144 episodes in honor of the 20th anniversary of the show's ending: "It's not consequential in the final season, but it's much-needed levity in an otherwise heavy Season Seven."

Billie Doux, in a mixed review, called it very "funny, frothy, and well written. ... Michelle Trachtenberg showed some serious range." Reviewer Noel Murray called it "fairly inconsequential" but added, "The staging of the last act of 'Him' is pretty crackerjack, with the four ladies' schemes taking place first in split-screen and then in a series of boffo gags." Dan Owen, awarding it 3 out of 5 stars, thought it "an enjoyable hour of BtVS, which got better once the fundamental issue started to grow in complexity. ... I think this episode wasn't as funny as it thought it was," but its "silly, charming moments... held this amusing episode together."

Entertainment Weekly praises Trachtenberg's "dramatic and comedic potential" and the "tongue-in-cheek storytelling" — "with split-screen action backed by a '70s soundtrack and the pairing of reluctant partners Spike and Xander," all in all voting it a hilarious episode.

title: Him (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)


text:
Talk:Him (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

Untitled
Please help complete the Angel/Buffy episode articles. See what needs to be done on this sub-page of WikiProject Buffy:

WikiProject Buffy/Episodes

Also please help update any major changes made to episode articles on that page so that progress can be mapped.

________________________________________________________

Goof
There seems to be a goof: Dawn forgets her bag after her talk with Wood and Buffy. She has it in the next scene in the school hallway. Of course she could just have returned in the meantime to fetch it. My general question is: Are goofs wished on the Buffy episode pages or not? Lofote 08:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Buffy706.jpg
Image:Buffy706.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 07:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Rocket Launcher
The rocket launcher Buffy used in season two - an AT4 - is a one use weapon system. After being fired once, the tube is discarded and cannot be reloaded. Buffy would not have been able to kill Principle Wood with it even if she wasn't stopped by Spike. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.73.239.228 (talk) 16:22, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Buffy706.jpg
Image:Buffy706.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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, 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) 19:24, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Him (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)