text:
Talk:Primark

BHS Ireland purchase
AKAIK, BHS never is one of the ex-BHS sites, incidently. --83.70.59.159 17:20, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Jervis Street. They were an anchor tenant there when it opened, although I actually think thats closed down again by now - I can't remember seeing it last time I was there. --Kiand 19:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Merge Penneys into this article
Primark is a very cheap shop :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.188.28.99 (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

As suggested at Penneys by someone else - I'd support, Penneys and Primark are one and the same, even the logo is the same, only the logotype is different. They offer the same proposition and services. Penneys actually predates Primark, however since Primark is their corporate name (the Penneys stores have "Penneys - Operated by Primark" on their packaging) I would suggest leaving it at this location with a redirect at Penneys.

--Rdd 16:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

How it works
I'm not sure the information contained there has any place in an encylopedia, but I've moved it here in case somebody wants to put it back in.

--Rdd 16:05, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

How it works: Each section (or department) runs the operational side of the business. The (tactical) floor manager selects the stock that should be ordered and placed on the shop floor. The manager (strategic) controls the local shop, unlike other companies franchise system. The manager remain in control of the store and can function independently from other local chains.

Departments and codes: 1=Accessories. 2=Socks and Tights. 3=NOT USED. 4=Womens Apparel. 5=Childrens Wear. 6=Mens Wear. 7=Shoes. 8=Womens Wear. 9=Special deals / Reduced Clothing. 11=Homeware 23/24=Xmas Shop 26=Sportswear 27=Todlerswear Pay: Standard wage for Sales Assistants. £3.69 per hour (under 18) £4.92 (£5.55 with London weighting) per hour (over 18) No paid breaks or lunches Overtime is standard rate Biometric hand system installed

here pay is £3.83 under 18, £4.99 over 18, no overtime 81.156.33.251 08:49, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Advertising
I have cut the paragraph -

 * This reputation has come about despite the company spending very little on advertising, which has consisted of little more than press releases to local newspapers as new stores have opened. A major exception to this is their Christmas advertising campaign, which has run on radio each Christmas (and occasionally on Irish television). In contrast to their main competitors, Matalan and George at ASDA, Primark have never advertised on television in the UK, and there is evidence that most of Primark's customers first heard about the store through word of mouth.

I REALLY don't think that its sourcable. Can't imagine any company not marketing itself in one way or another - If its important please discuss Mike33 13:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It may be - I have started working in a flagship Primark store, and the above statement is more or less true; the HR person who finished off the induction said almost the same thing as the above statement.

 * In any case, it has advertised on UK Television, although possibly only Northern Ireland, not Great Britain. NotMuchToSay 19:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Seems to be a couple of contradictions in the article about advertising, with one section saying they do not advertise, and another saying that they do... Also the largest store in this article claims to be Manchester, but in the Oxford Street article it claims to be there. I have never been to either of these stores, or seen any advertising, so am not really in a position to correct it myself. Craighennessey 00:18, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

in regards to floor space the Manchester store is the biggest in the company having 100,000 sq ft but originally Oxford Street waa the biggest when opened, Manchester took the position when TK Maxx relocated giving Primark the full building. Advertising is only fairly new within Primark, when opening a new store there is local coverage but on a whole the company doesn't really have advertising. Penneys have a christmas advert and a jingle which is well known in Ireland but unheard of in England. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.140.173 (talk) 21:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Tidy up
I have had a go at tidying it up, but there is still loads to do. Comments on my alterations would help me as I am fairly new to this--Screen42 23:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I think this paragraph is slightly confusing:

'''All workers in their associated factories are paid a living wage that as a bare minimum covers all their basic needs and are consistent with local wage laws. All associated factory are paid the equivalent of at least the UK minimum wage in their country. Primark has deals with factories in Madrid and Vietnam and do not manufacture clothing in Bangladesh. ''' "All associated factory are paid" - should it say, "All associated factory workers"? Also: in the paragraph before, it quotes Geoff Lancaster talking about raising standards in Bangladesh - which appears to contradict the final sentence above. Can anyone make this clearer?217.68.21.230 12:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I changed this whole section as it was both unsourced and factually incorrect. 86.136.142.95 18:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed vandalism
I removed a comment left by someone: "Its totally fabulous for lil cheapie bargains and you can customize them and if you go wrong it doesnt really matter beacause they are so cheap!"

Lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.22.12 (talk) 07:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation
It is noted in the Trivia that Primark is pronounced "Pree-mark" in NI, but "Pry-mark" in Great Britain. When I lived in Glasgow everyone said "Pree-mark." Is this just a Glasgow thing, or should the trivia be changed to "Pree-mark" in NI and Scotland? Spiderdust 04:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

no you are right, in scotland it is pronounced preemark, probably due to the fact that the scottish head office is in dublin and is not the same as the english head office Davidb90 14:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I would say this was purely down to the accents of the Scottish and the Irish to be honest rather than it having anything to do with where the head office is based. My Husband and all his family are Scottish and all pronounce it 'preemark' but if u asked them why they pronounce in that way none of them would be able to make the connection with the way they pronounce the word to the fact that the head office is in Dublin. They dont know where the head office is. The Scottish pronounce a lot of words differently to the English purely because of the difference in their accents. For example, Scottish people pronounce the world 'police' as 'polis'. The general way they sound their words is completely different in many respects.TammiMagee 10:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

nope sorry your wrong, neds pronounce 'police' as 'polis', polis is just wrong, nothing to do with accent. the point i was trying to make is if the staff in scotland pronounce it preemark, then the customers are going to do the same. "The general way they sound their words is completely different in many respects" and generally correct! the english cannot (or do not) pronounce 'wh' 'aw' 'r' 81.156.33.251 08:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I live near Birmingham, and most people I know say "Pree-mark". Honestly, this is the first time I've ever read that British/English people say "Pry-mark". In my experience, they just don't. 86.132.141.178 17:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC) I live near Edingbrugh, and we call Primark Pree-mark. In england they call it Pry-mark and in Ireland they call it Penneys. Honestly just stick to the one name. MON/30/03/09 18:13PM

I remember a Christmas TV advertising campaign on Ulster TV during the eighties with the slogan "Primark, got a whole lotta things for Christmas, got a lot for the family" - it was definitly pronouned 'pree-mark' back then, however i have family in liverpool who insist on calling it 'pry-mark'.

That advert campaign (with the slogan "Penny's, got a whole lotta things..." etc) has ran every Christmas in living memory in the Irish media, until very recently. Incidently, the Primark name was apparently invented due to the company's inabillity to use Penny's outside of Ireland due to registration of the name by JC Penny.--Rdd 16:20, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have only ever heard the word pronounced with primary stress on the first syllable, ie /'pɹaɪmɑːk/ or /'pɹiːmɑːk/, et cetera. 130.88.85.111 (talk) 15:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm in Wigan, and it's always Pry-mark. If someone said 'Preemark' they would get very funny looks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.234.199.137 (talk) 15:35, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

If it was meant to be pronounced 'Preemark' then would the spelling not be Pree or Prea. Pri is usually pronounced /aɪ/ as in Prime or /ɪ/ as in Primitive. The word Primary is only one letter different from the word Primark and Primary is pronounced /aɪ/. I was told that the actually pronunciation is prɪmahrk but due to certain accents in Ireland it was often mispronounced with an ee sound instead of ɪ.

Why does the pronounciation section have "Northern Ireland, Ireland" listed? It should be Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, or in this case, seen as it is a whole island thing, just "Ireland." Am I Right?--82.46.48.147 (talk) 13:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

 * I genuinely can't believe anyone with half a brain cell would pronounce it "pree-mark". It's ridiculous. In Scotland, the education level before secondary/high school is not "pree-mary" school, its "pry-mary" school, spelled, yes, you guessed it "Primary". This pronunciation is prevalent throughout the English language. One idiot pronouncing a work wrong should not warrant a nation doing it or we will all end up talking nonsense!

Their Christmas TV and radio advertising jingle in 1980s did indeed pronounce the name as 'Pree-mark' https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELnuijThhpU - here's their advert in 1981, 2nd ad in the clip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.255.234.91 (talk) 19:02, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

More Vandalism
Removed "It is also Reilly Marshalls (of Nottingham) favourite shop, it is reported that he once spent an astonishing £11 there in one go. He purchased ten shirts, six pairs of socks, twelve t shirts and three pairs of jeans" from the article, why is this article so prone to vandalism? This comment was left by §©ʁİƃƀȴıŋ’ Ƨł₥ȫȠ   talk 15:30, 22 May 2007 (UTC). Its prounounced Pre-mark as in 'pre-mark-up' prices hence the low end pricing of merchandise

"Fat Wear"
Is there actually such a department??? Artybrad 22:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * No[|No]. I will remove. This comment was left by §©ʁİƃƀȴıŋ’ Ƨł₥ȫȠ   talk 17:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Store Structure
Is this section necessary? Is it of any interest to anyone except employees? There is nothing remarkable or significantly different compared to other retailers, and I have looked at other retailer's articles and none seem to have details regarding staff pay and low level management structure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gandygatt (talk • contribs) 01:16, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree - this is a Wikipedia page, not Primark's corporate website. If no one has objected within a week I will remove this section. Smurfmeister (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Source?
Removing:"2009 primark are planning to make verious adverts on televison. They have recently said that they do make children make their clothes" Don't Know Whether It's Just Bad Spelling Or Just Completely False. And I Sincerely Doubt The Second Part. Give Me A Source, I Might Believe It. Until Then I'm Removing It QuietusExtraho (talk) 22:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Are you really criticising someone's spelling before capitalising every word in your post??? Smurfmeister (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

New Logo
I have just uploaded the new logo, I had a few problems with the uploading because Wikipedia keeps thinking it's a duplicate, I have now also included a Non Free rationale on the logo page. Bevanl (talk) 20:09, 23 September 2008 (UTC).

Number of stores?
The article differs from the "Company Profile" section on here. Which is right? --HighKing (talk) 09:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Headquarters
Are the headquarters definitely in Ireland? I can find no reference on the Primark, now the ABF website confirming this. Pennys may have started in Ireland, but where does Primark come in? Was it a merger or take-over or just a different name?Darkieboy236 (talk) 14:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Definetly in Mary Street, Dublin, this was even stated on the BBC Panorama programme on the company. This may change since Arthur Ryan is retiring. As for the Penneys/Primark, its just a different name. The chain was owned from the very beginning by ABF and originally called Penney's. The name "Primark" allegedly came about due to fear of litigation from J.C. Penney. Rdd (talk) 19:27, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, see http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31978D0193:EN:HTML for an authoritative account. Most relevant fragment below. Anyone up for updating the article as appropriate (ideally creating a 'history' section)?

5. On 26 February 1976, to settle their pending litigations and proceedings, Penney America and the ABF Group entered into the notified agreement, which became effective on 27 August 1976 (the operative date) and which is outlined below. (a) The ABF Group shall not use "Penneys" as a trademark or - except as a business name in Ireland - as a trade name in any country of the world, shall change all company names or titles, so as to eliminate "Penneys" therefrom, and shall never organize or acquire a business which includes this name. It shall also proceed to phase out step by step in Scotland and Northern Ireland all use of "Penneys" as a trademark, trade name or otherwise. Such phasing out shall be completed during 1978. Penney America shall cause the trademark registrations of "Power", "Quinnsworth", "Finefare", "Fine Ware" and "City Girl" to be relinquished. They acknowledge that the word "Primark" is not confusingly similar to "Penneys". While these trademark registrations and "Primark" may be used by the ABF Group, "Penneys" may be used by Penney America as a trademark and, except in Ireland, as a trade name in all countries of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.155.151.233 (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

pronunciation
Seems odd that the stress would be on the mark. Can anyone confirm? kwami (talk) 23:16, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Out of date information
Some of the information on the page is out of date.

The total number of stores primark now has is up to 232 due to opening new stores in the united kingdom (bexleyheath). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattricus (talk • contribs) 23:09, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

2013 Savar building collapse
This is an event with a tangential connection with Primark at best. It shouldn't be mentioned in the Primark article. --HighKing (talk) 11:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

I disagree with your two sentences. We can count how many articles in just The Guardian about both Primark and the incident.

Anyway I put up a tag to ask for third opinion here. Best, New worl (talk) 11:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Hello. I'm assuming that the below blockquote is the content in question?

On 25 April, 2013, a garment factory in Rana Plaza, Dhaka, Bangladesh, housing some 3000 workers collapsed, causing the deaths more than 400 people. Primark is one of the recipients of clothing made at the factory. The part of the factory making clothes for Primark was on the second floor.
 * Yes, Technical 13. It was the only part in the section Incidents that was deleted twice by HighKing who kept using a bunch of WP terms. New worl (talk) 14:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * My questions that may help figure this out are:
 * Does the factory "only" make clothing for Primark?
 * Is it the "only" factory that makes clothing for Primark?
 * How much coverage did Primark get in the article covering the story about the collapse?
 * Let's start with those questions and see if we can't find out whether or not it should really be in there. :) Technical 13 (talk) 11:48, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi. I've updated the paragraph to better reflect the noteworthy elements of the link between Primark and the collapse of the building.  To answer your questions:
 * the factory did not solely supply Primark - it was an 8 storey building that housed many different factories, shops and a bank. The various factories producted items for a range of customers including  the Benetton Group, Joe Fresh, The Children's Place, Primark, Monsoon, and DressBarn. (New worl has added the same info to all those articles).
 * It is not the only factory. Primark has many many suppliers throughout the world.
 * Well - take a look at the wikipedia article 2013 Savar building collapse. Primark does get a mention, especially in British press (gives it a British angle - same press wouldn't mention Joe Fresh or Benneton in the article, whereas in the US press it's vice versa).
 * It's a tragic event, and has it's own article, but it is only tangentially related to the companies that were the customers of the factories. The factories were independently owned.  Note that originally this was tacked into the "Criticisms" section (and still is in "criticisms" sections in other articles).  How can it be a "criticism"?  That is potentially libellous, inferring that these companies had some part or fault in the building collapse.  --HighKing (talk) 12:08, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Are there any reports of Primark being impacted by this? Would a single sentence like "The 2013 Savar building collapse (affected|impacted|caused) Primark (in a certain way|to do something to fill the lack of supplies coming in)." have any reliable sources to cite it with? This way, the collapse could be mentioned in a way that will allow the reader to follow the link to read up on it if they chose, but not have all the extra details that I agree probably do not belong. Technical 13 (talk) 12:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * There are no reports of Primark being impacted - but this BBC article reports that Primark (and Loblaw) said they will be offering aid to the victims, and this articles states "Primark has been working with other retailers to review the country's approach to factory standards and will now push for this review to include building integrity".  That's about the only Primark relevant discussions in *all* the articles.  It's an event, for sure, but in my opinion it simply doesn't meet the criteria to mention it at all in the articles on the various retailers.  I've no problem with the 2013 Savar building collapse article listing the various retailers that used these companies as suppliers, but it's not necessary to list the building collapse in each article on each retailer.  --HighKing (talk) 17:22, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Technical 13 for your volunteer support. I agree that going to the article 2013 Savar building collapse is a good approach. I can see a bigger picture there, more than a building collapse. I think the Pope have a part of a big picture here: On 1st May, Pope Francis spoke out against the working conditions in the factory: :"A headline that really struck me on the day of the tragedy in Bangladesh was 'Living on 38 euros a month'. That is what the people who died were being paid. This is called slave labour. Today in the world this slavery is being committed against something beautiful that God has given us -- the capacity to create, to work, to have dignity. How many brothers and sisters find themselves in this situation! Not paying fairly, not giving a job because you are only looking at balance sheets, only looking at how to make a profit. That goes against God!" — Preceding unsigned comment added by New worl (talk • contribs) 14:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

The Guardian has an image here. How it may be named! New worl (talk) 14:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Your comment of "I can see a bigger picture here" worries me. Wikipedia isn't a news channel, or a mechanism for publicizing a particular point of view.  For example, the pope comment isn't relevant to the Primark article, because the pope doesn't mention Primark.  So why bring it up?  Adding this into "Criticism" sections shows that you are looking at this incident with a POV which includes associating Primark with the low wages and dangerous working conditions.  Unless you can find sources to back up your view (and they meet the criteria for sources), the rest is simply WP:OR.  --HighKing (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Are you sure that you don't see any link between the image and 'Living on 38 euros a month'? Do you see the image yet? New worl (talk) 17:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

 * HighKing and New worl, I'm marking this as "helped" now and will continue watching it and commenting where needed. WP:NPOV is very important here, I agree.  I also think that in regards to the original question, that the collapsed should be mentioned "if" it had some citable impact on Primark as my suggestion above says.  The pope has nothing to do about this discussion, slavery and whatnot doesn't belong in this discussion either.  Let's stay on topic New worl... Technical 13 (talk) 17:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

'Sweatshops' & Primark
Hi HighKing,

You have been with Wikipedia longer than I am and I thought you know more about Wikipedia values, pillars, etc. than I do...

Now I will do some Google search ''Sweatshops' & Primark' for you so that all editors can have more resources to improve the article.

 * I'm not sure if that is intended to be some kind of threat and or whom it may be directed at. What I can tell you is that vandalism will not be tolerated and I won't hesitate to report it and let an administrator figure out what your comment above implies.  I can also tell you that if I was an administrator on this wiki, I would likely consider that a threat and you would end up blocked. Technical 13 (talk) 18:20, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Hi Technical 13. I didn't mean so. English is not my mother tongue. I will change my sentence. Best, New worl (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Technical13, I'm sure he didn't mean he was going to try to Google HighKing; he was going to Google whatever subject you guys are talking about to provide information to HighKing. No comment on the underlying issue, I'm just passing thru from the help desk. --Floquenbeam (talk) 18:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * My comment was in regard to the fact that his wording made me think that he was upset about something, was going to Google every possible piece of unreliable blog stuffs he could find and spam the crap out of the article with useless information. I simply wanted to make clear that would not be allowed as it is WP:POINTy... Technical 13 (talk) 19:14, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not happy with words such as ' every possible piece of unreliable blog stuffs', 'spam the crap', 'useless information'. Best, New worl (talk) 19:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Could you please tell me if Technical 13's words such as 'going to Google every possible piece of unreliable blog stuffs he could find and spam the crap out of the article with useless information' and his post here User_talk:New_worl are violations of And could you please tell me if his participation in the talk is really neutral as a third opinion provider?
 * Harassment including threats ('I can also tell you that if I was an administrator on this wiki, I would likely consider that a threat and you would end up blocked')
 * Civility and
 * Please do not bite the newcomers

You can see more reference information here Help_desk

Thank you very much. Best, New worl (talk) 09:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Hello New worl! I'm going to help you out here and get you the help you requested.  Let me echo a few people. User:Yunshui, User:Boing! said Zebedee, User:iridescent, User:Writ Keeper, User:Nerdfighter, User:Vacation9, User:Fluffernutter, User:Sladen, User:Thumperward, and User:AutomaticStrikeout should do the trick for you... I consider them all to be fair and non-bias people.  Before you claim that they are all my friends or whatnot, I'll inform you them most of them were involved in my (un)blocking a month and a half ago.  Most of them are administrators, and most of them denied my unblock requests.  Now that I'm satisfied that you will have ample other opinions to settle your dispute, I'm stepping away from this article.  I've been as neutral as can be (I'd never heard of Primark before now being whereas I'm a Levi's - Fruit of the Loom kind of guy from USA) in regards to this topic. Note: I'm unwatching this page and if I was wrong here in my concerns, assessments, and or warning, I would appreciate a note on my talk page (not a page mention) telling me my mistake and I would be happy to come back and apologize set things straight.  I currently do not see this as a possibility, but wanted to get that out there. I wish everyone a good day and happy editings!!! Technical 13 (talk) 13:37, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * From what I can see, User:Technical 13 misunderstood what you were saying and took it as a threat, then saying "If you did that you would be blocked", and I can see why if that's what you meant. While I know it's not, I wouldn't interpret that as harassment or a threat, just trying to tell you that you would be blocked if you kept making threats like that. While it may be a bit BITEy, I believe it was perfectly appropriate given the circumstances. Just my view though. Vaca  tion  9  15:22, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Vacation9 very much for your opinion. I agree with you that at first there was a misunderstanding. I took advice from Floquenbeam at Help_desk and stopped there by just saying nicely "I am not happy with words such as ' every possible piece of unreliable blog stuffs', 'spam the crap', 'useless information'. Best,"

 * After my edits here, he told me at my talk page that "if you add defamatory content to Wikipedia again, as you did at Primark, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.". That's why I asked for help to see if any of these are violated: Harassment, neutral, Civility, Please do not bite the newcomers. Thank you again. Best, New worl (talk) 16:01, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * All information for my edits here are referenced through the citation of reliable published sources, so as to maintain a standard of verifiability (quote from Libel. New worl (talk) 16:19, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * This seems resolved; Technical 13 provided a long list of people you might ask for third opinions. While I'm sure we all despise child labor or the working conditions in Bangladesh, Wikipedia is not a soapbox to be used for advocacy. We should not base significant amounts of content solely on advocacy organizations and discredited (!) news reports. Huon (talk) 19:42, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for your great support. Technical 13 and I say 'peace' now for the better of Wikipedia. Cheers, New worl (talk) 14:25, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The timeline
Link

2009

 * 1) Primark linked to UK sweatshops
 * 2) Primark in storm over conditions at UK supplier

2008

 * 1) protest hits Primark shows some of India's poorest people, including children, working long, gruelling hours for poverty pay on Primark clothes in slum workshops and refugee camps. Another article Another one

2006

 * 1) War on Want report finds child labourers in Bangladesh making Primark clothes for 3p an hour. Another source

I've reverted your additions. It seems to me that it is very much WP:OR due to selective sourcing to sensationalize the notion that Primark endorses slave labour. It is very WP:POINTy to continue to add to this article after the discussion above. If you want to add something in that is potentially libelous, please get agreement here first. For example, what exactly is the relevance to the story that protesters surrounded a Primark store on Oxford street? One store? Out of 256? Seems to me that it's a very poor attempt to place a quote into the article from "War on Want" - what evidence is there that Primark didn't take their responsibility clearly? Is Murray Worthy an expert on Primark work relations and practices? Is Primark's behaviour unusual for the clothing retail sector? Similarly, we don't use the article to overly praise Primark or report on every event that Primark was involved in. We don't list every award they've won, or we don't mention their staff raising money for Children In Need, etc, etc. It's not a company newsletter or bulletin board. Personally, I don't believe the building collapse should even be mentioned in the article - as has been pointed out, Primark didn't own the factories, had no part in running the factories, and was simply used the clothing manufacturer as a supplier. Please, could other editors weigh in with their opinions on this and lend a hand so that some sort of consensus can be reached please. --HighKing (talk) 16:44, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Did you read before revert?
HighKing, you reverted at least two edits without understanding how such edits help improving the article:
 * 1st edit by 180.234.93.156, updating the death toll from 501 to 550 in the building collapse: link
 * 2nd by me, providing clear explanation (link not found, +): link

Please explain why you did so. New worl (talk) 08:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's the problem with spreading the same data into different articles - nobody bothers to update all the articles later. I see the death toll is now over 600 for example.  Who will update all the articles with correct death tolls?  Is it not better to simply wikilink to the main article?
 * Usually when disagreements break out on articles, it is best to simply stop editing the article until consensus can be reached. Mixing controversial edits with fixups isn't recommended because the whole lot is liable to get reverted, especially when the edits are mixed in sequence.
 * But thank you for not reverting all your edits again. Have you had a chance to understand (not necessarily agree) why I object to mentioning the tragic incident in the article? --HighKing (talk) 16:11, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * You said 'nobody bothers to update all the articles later' and then you reverted the edit which was done gracefully by 180.234.93.156.
 * I cannot accept your explanation for the two reverses. New worl (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Have you updated the Benneton Group article? Or the List of industrial disasters? Or what about Joe Fresh? This is my point about including low-level detail that is subject to rapid change in articles.  Many of the articles you inserted a mention are now out of date.  So equally, other editors might take the stance that it is unwise to accept your "good intentions" to keep everything up to date.  So far, it seems some "anonymous" IP editor is trying to do the job, and usually without adding a reference.  My advice would be to not include any fact or figure that might need updating - that way the up-to-date facts and figures can be kept in the main article, with references.
 * So back to the question I posed. Have we any sort of agreement or consensus about the article?  And the other articles you added a mention of the incident?  --HighKing (talk) 16:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

The normal way of discussing something is sequential, so that the timeline of discussion is preserved, and other editors can see how a discussion progressed. New worl, your style of starting multiple discussions in several sections just doesn't work. Can you please, in future, sequentially add your responses to the bottom of the current discussion. Do not edit others comments (although you can cut and paste to respond. And try to keep it short as possible.  --HighKing (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC).

Arbitrary break
New Worl, you originally edited this article to insert a mention of the Savar incident. You've posted about 12 links which *you* say are relevant, but the only common thread are lots of pretty sensational and potentially libelous statements from "War on Want" (a tiny charity that tackles "poverty"), low paid workers manufacturing high street fashion for a variety of high street stores, and the fact that most of the links are from between 2006 and 2008 around the time the BBC made a documentary. None are relevant to this article in my opinion. They're mostly out of date. Just because Primark is mentioned as an example of a store, does not make it notable for inclusion in this article. That's pretty much my take on it. Since we disagree, there's no consensus, and we should really try to engage other editors into the discussion so that the matter can be resolved, because I don't believe we're going to resolve this between us. --HighKing (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Two additions
I propose some additions. First I have two. I also prepare the format of 'why' and 'why not'. Please add your comments. New worl (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Facts in 2006 (to be added): In December 2006 investigators find sweatshops in Bangladesh where workers are making Primark clothes for 5p an hour. Link: The Independent
 * Facts in 2008 (to be added): In June 2008 Panorama finds 9 year olds working on Primark clothes in India for 60p a day. Link: The Observer

More reliable sources:

 * 1) The Guardian: link 3 (An 80-hour week for 5p an hour: the real price of high-street fashion) and link 4 (What can you buy for 5p in Bangladesh?)
 * 2) The Daily Telegraph: link 5 (Engaging the high street is the way to ethical clothes)
 * 3) The Herald (Glasgow): link 6 (Revealed)
 * 4) Retail Week: link 7 (Retailers slammed over factory conditions)
 * 5) Manchester Evening News: link 8 (Disgusting... but Primark's so cheap)
 * 6) The Independent:link 9 (Primark faces new claims that it uses sweatshop labour), link 10 (Primark faces demonstration after child labour TV exposé), link 11 (British retailers sell cheap clothes as workers suffer), link 12 (The real cost of fashion: a special report)

 * WHY:
 * Verifiability
 * The current article only stated many numbers of different types of stores(1), number of locations(2), dates of first openings in every countries(3), how large stores are(4), etc. No information at all about people who make the products, how they are treated, how they are paid. It's a violation of Neutral point of view
 * Fact 2006 is the cause of 'In 2006, Primark joined the Ethical Trading Initiative, a collaborative organization bringing together businesses, trades unions and NGOs to work on labour rights issues in their supply chains' (quoted in the article) The article cannot omit the reason of Primark's join in the Ethical Trading Initiative. New worl (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * WHY NOT:

 * Let's not prepare the "why" and "why not" format because it calls for responses interspersed with your comments, and this isn't the best format for wikipedia where individual comments would no longer be kept together.
 * It is impossible to answer your questions as you've posed them, so lets step back a little. What is the Notable addition you with to make to the article?  Note that adding a bunch of facts isn't the role of the Wikipedia article.  As I've said above, we don't make a note of a "fact" every time the work "Primark" hits a news article or is mentioned on the TV.  This isn't the company bulletin board.  --HighKing (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

 * They are not simple facts. Without such facts, this article is a very good example of how Neutral point of view has been violated for such a long long time. The facts should be included as soon as possible to preserve (at least) one of five Wikipedia pillars.
 * You also state above that the article should mention the people who make the products. Why?  We don't mention the employees, or their working conditions or pension arrangements.  Why should the article mention people who don't even work for Primark?  Or how would you suggest we limit the external people that should be mentioned?  Should we mention the people who work for the company that write the software that runs their computer systems?  Or perhaps we should also mention the person that works for the cleaning contractor that cleans their stores in Spain?
 * BTW, you appear to misunderstand NPOV - that policy is to ensure that articles don't take sides. You say it is against policy (NPOV) to *not* mention these facts.  I disagree, and what's more, your attempt to link Primark with responsibility for the incident is unsourced, is original research and potentially libelous.  --HighKing (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

New worl - you were told previously that it's not a good idea to edit other people's comments. That includes interspersing your responses with another editor's comment. Can you sort the mess you've made above out to separate your response please. --HighKing (talk) 10:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

 * HighKing, could you please focus on one main point per paragraph?
 * I also added sub-headings so that all editors can follow the talk easily. New worl (talk) 13:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Disclaimer
New worl is a normal and neutral editor. I and my family have never ever:
 * 1) worked in fashion, retail industry;
 * 2) worked for advocacy group;
 * 3) worked for this sort of companies
 * 4) gone to Bangladesh nor
 * 5) known a Bangladeshi in person.

I didn't know about Primark until the building collapse.

I made the first edit in this article on 2 May 2013 here

HighKing, as a long term (since January 2009) and most contributed editor (51 v. 27 edits of 2nd most) in this article, is that O.K. for you to provide some disclaimer? Best, New worl (talk) 13:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think what you're trying to do, in a roundabout way, is ask if I have a possible conflict of interest WP:COI in editing this article. Rest assured, I don't.  BTW, your disclaimer isn't necessary.  We all try to WP:AGF and judge on actions and edits.  But I really really don't like the tone and insinuation behind your "innocent" request.  So please don't try to look for reasons to somehow devalue another editors contributions by suggesting that the editor may have an agenda.  It's in poor taste, and fishing for private information is seen in poor taste and frowned upon.  --HighKing (talk) 14:47, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

 * How many times have you used bad adjectives for me? Do I do the same for you? No. Not to mention that I am a new comer here. Best, New worl (talk) 15:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Plus, you can count how many times you have used "someone trying to do" + your assumption for other editors. Is this WP:AGF? New worl (talk) 15:12, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Believe me, I've been very patient with you. But AGF only takes you so far - after that, the actions and comments of other editors become clear.  I cannot think of any other reason why you would directly ask an editor, who disagreed with you, to make a disclaimer statement.  In all my years, I've never seen that.  I think it's a pretty sneaky tactic and my advice to you is not to try it on again.  If that is a "bad adjective", feel free to complain.  Or better still, explain why you requested a disclaimer in the first place.  --HighKing (talk) 15:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Because you clearly have had bad assumptions for me.
 * 1/ You said that I am 'trying to do some Original Research to somehow continue to link Primark with the Savar incident'. You said that " attempting to link responsibility with Primark and other companies to this incident", etc.
 * 2/ You even questioned an anonymous by using " " and discredited his support. Your words: "anonymous" IP editor is trying to do the job, and usually without adding a reference.
 * 3/ You used many bad adjectives here.
 * So I must protect myself, I need to let other editors know that I do not have personal interest here at all. A disclaimer would be perfect for that purpose.
 * It's all up to you. That's why I said 'is that OK'. I am not you and I would not link that question with anything at all. Cheers, New worl (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Is article's current version a very good example of NPOV violation?
Yes. Because:
 * The current article only stated many numbers of different types of stores(1), number of locations(2), dates of first openings in every countries(3), how large stores are(4), etc. No information at all about people who make the products, how they are treated, how they are paid.
 * Fact 2006 is the cause of 'In 2006, Primark joined the Ethical Trading Initiative, a collaborative organization bringing together businesses, trades unions and NGOs to work on labour rights issues in their supply chains' (quoted in the article) The article cannot omit the reason of Primark's join in the Ethical Trading Initiative. New worl (talk) 17:33, 5 May 2013 (UTC) New worl (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This was answered already above. Those workers were not employed by Primark, but by a supplier.  It simply giving Undue Weight to mention a supplier's workers without potentially mentioning others as well, etc.  You were already told this in the Pope Francis article.  If you want to grind an axe about poor conditions, take it somewhere else.  We don't use articles for soapboxing.  Also, if you have a good reference providing the reasons why Primark joined, I think that could be mentioned if it is deemed relevant.  --HighKing (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

 * First, please re-read the talk in the Pope Francis article to see how others responsed. For example, Andrewman327 said that 'If there is additional coverage of statements made about workers rights, it might warrant a subsection...'
 * Second, can you go to Criticism_of_Apple_Inc. and Nike,_Inc. to have a simple but eye-opening experience for you.
 * Third, this Guardian article stated that 'Primark and Monsoon, have been caught up in recent exposés of labour practices through rogue suppliers ' New worl (talk) 10:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Re. 'We don't mention the employees, or their working conditions or pension arrangements'
Answer: A very easy task for you because you edited this article since Jan 2009: Provide articles about Primark's employees that meet Verifiability New worl (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * You're missing the point. We don't mention the employees because there's nothing notable or relevant to this article about them.  Sure, we could.  We chose not to.  Perhaps in the future something notable and relevant will cause someone to add to this article, but it hasn't happened yet.  The point isn't about verifiability, it's about relevance.  --HighKing (talk) 17:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Then don't use such subjects in your argument. They will weaken yours. New worl (talk) 10:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you are being deliberately obtuse, or if you just fail to see the point. Once again.  We don't metion the employees because there's nothing notable or relevant to this article in doing that.  Similarly, we don't mention the people that clean the offices or wash windows or supply the computer systems, etc.  And that's the same relationship that the workers making clothes has with Primark.  As you've been already told, mentioning them would be WP:UNDUE and probably fail WP:NOTABILITY.  --HighKing (talk) 11:36, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Re. 'external people'
They are not notable. And please provide Verifiability if you disagree. New worl (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Excellent, you agree that "external people" are not relevant. Can we now also agree that the "external people" working for other companies, supplying goods and services are also not relevant, even if a tragic incident occurs?  --HighKing (talk) 17:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Please go to Criticism_of_Apple_Inc. and Nike,_Inc..  New worl (talk) 10:18, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note how these are separate articles. If you want to set up a "Criticism of Primark" article, then that would be a good place to write about various work practices (so long as its sourced, etc).  But they don't belong in the main article for an incident where the connection is that Primark did business with one of the companies in the building that collapsed.  --HighKing (talk) 11:31, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you read Nike,_Inc.? New worl (talk) 11:35, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I think that the Nike link to sweatshops was very notable and received extensive coverage in news reports, books and even documentaries. In those reports, the focus was about Nike (and not the sweatshops per se), and therefore Nike wasn't a tangential mention, and the event was notable.  I don't see the same criteria with your linking of Primark and other retailers with the building collapse.  --HighKing (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Which books, which documentaries? Do you know how to cite your sources? New worl (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

 * Do you see Apple_Inc.? New worl (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

How about 'Primark and Monsoon, have been caught up in recent exposés of labour practices through rogue suppliers (Guardian 2010 article) New worl (talk) 11:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * What's the title of the article? Is Primark or Monsoon the focus of the article, with detailed reporting and maybe some facts and figures?  Has an investigation been carried out? Or (in the interests of NPOV) is it simply a reporter adding big names to an article to generate some sensational coverage?  Also, do I take it (seeing as this article is from 2010) that you're still trying to do some Original Research to somehow continue to link Primark with the Savar incident?  --HighKing (talk) 11:50, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you mean by the last sentence. Please explain. New worl (talk) 12:14, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Re. 'libelous'
"I disagree, and what's more, your attempt to link Primark with responsibility for the incident is unsourced, is original research and potentially libelous." You need to watch your language when you talk about editors. I did not attempt to link anything. The following info is from Reliable source: The Guardian
 * On 27 April protesters surrounded Primark store on Oxford Street in the City of Westminster in the West End of London. Speaking outside the store, Murray Worthy, from campaign group War on Want, said: ‘We’re here to send a clear message to Primark that the 300 deaths in the Bangladesh building collapse were not an accident – they were entirely preventable deaths. If Primark had taken its responsibility to those workers seriously, no one need have died this week.’ New worl (talk) 18:27, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
 * That's twice you've said I need to watch my language. Please inform me what exactly you find offensive to you because it's becoming very clear to me that by adding handpicked quotes and links to articles, you are attempting to link responsibility with Primark and other companies to this incident.  Otherwise, please explain why you have chosen the quote above which states "If Primark had taken its responsibility to those workers seriously, no one need have died this week.".
 * And just because "The Guardian" reports on an event, it doesn't make the event notable (as per WP:EVENT) and it certainly doesn't grant factual status (or lessen the potential libellous nature) to any comments to a spokesperson for a fringe organization like War on Want. --HighKing (talk) 17:44, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

 * 1. Can you count again how many times I said so? And can you count how many times you said 'libelous' or 'libellous'?
 * 2. Do you read Wikipedia definition for 'libelous' before using such word many times against editor here?
 * 3. I use that quote because I need to protect myself against your 'libelous' claim against me. New worl (talk) 10:22, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
 * This is getting silly. Please point out where I made a claim that what you said was libelous.  And again, I can't decide if you are being deliberately obtuse or if this is your normal interaction style.  Let me be clear.  A claim made by a spokesperson for "War on Want" directly blames Primark for the loss of life.  No evidence at all - they're still pulling bodies from the rubble - and *you* want to include the direct quote in an article?  That statement is potentially libelous, and if you think I'm being unreasonable, go ask someone else.  --HighKing (talk) 11:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

assd asd

] gefd d — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.166.188 (talk) 14:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

External Links - Most relevant/alphabetical
As far as I'm aware Article links go by most relevant, Not in alphabetical order...

WP:ELLAYOUT states A bulleted list of recommended relevant websites, each accompanied by a short description,

If Primark has more stores in IRE/UK then in Germany, It makes more sense to list IRE/UK first? Plus Primark was founded in IRE so again they should have more priority,

On another note I've never seen an alphabetical list on here in the 3yrs I've been here...

Thanks - →Davey 2010→ →Talk to me!→  14:44, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree in so far as the policy states only recommended relevant websites should be included. It says nothing about what order they should be added.  So how do we define "relevant" - that's the point at issue.  It could be the greatest number of stores. Or the highest revenue by country. Or the fastest growing market for Primark. Or the most employees. Or most customers. Or whatever other measurements of "relevant" there might be - that's the point.  You've chosen one method, but it's not clear why for any passing reader.  But it's a small point, and I'm happy to let it go. In the beginning I just felt you hadn't understood why I had sorted alphabetically, and why "relevant" doesn't actually translate to any particular ordering.  While I disagree with your reasons, it's not a big deal and hardly worth us getting in a knot over it.  --HighKing (talk) 18:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Good point .... I meant as in it being relevant store wise as well as founded wise,
 * I've looked through other store wikis (IE Debenhams, C. & J. Clark) and none include official sites to different languages so I've decided to remove them, We both definitely agree that warring over this is stupid, Anyway If you want to revert me then feel free as I think we both have different definitions of "relevant" ...
 * Thanks, →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  18:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Most(?) chains choose to not operate their own stores in multiple European countries - at best they'll grant a franchise. More relevant would be something like Tesco or Lidl I'd say, but they also don't list country specific websites.  Happy to go with something that makes sense, and unless and until another editor joins the discussion with a different viewpoint, I'm happy to go with yours.  --HighKing (talk) 19:04, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
 * That's actually very true, Anyway reverted..
 * Thaanks →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  19:33, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Conflicting info about Bonmarché
Note: The bit about sweatshops says "Several companies refused to sign, including Walmart, Carrefour, Bonmarché, Mango, Auchan and Kik. The agreement was signed by Primark, Loblaw, Bonmarche and El Corte Inglés.[31]" So did Bonmarche sign or not?

Strange and inappropriate that so much of this article focuses on overseas labour issues. It distorts the whole article and comes across as politically motivated. I'll wait for comments before editing 46.171.180.178 (talk)

 * I have had a look at the reference and cannot make out which is meant. We just reflect what the reference says - confusing as it is. May need a better reference that gives a clearer statement of the position. Keith D (talk) 19:23, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Primark. 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/20110618132300/http://www.primarkresponse.com/panorama/ to http://www.primarkresponse.com/panorama/

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) 20:02, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Primark. 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/20071008102159/http://www.ethicaltrade.org/Z/lib/2006/05/primark-press/index.shtml to http://www.ethicaltrade.org/Z/lib/2006/05/primark-press/index.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090302054854/http://waronwant.org/campaigns/supermarkets/fashion-victims/inform/16360-fashion-victims-ii to http://www.waronwant.org/campaigns/supermarkets/fashion-victims/inform/16360-fashion-victims-ii
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160325223918/http://www.dhakatribune.com/business/2013/nov/17/buyers%e2%80%99-compensation-rana-plaza-victims-far-reality to http://www.dhakatribune.com/business/2013/nov/17/buyers%E2%80%99-compensation-rana-plaza-victims-far-reality
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160709093857/https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/%E2%80%98cry-help%E2%80%99-prisoner-chinese-forced-labour-jail-alleged-have-been-found-inside-primark to https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases/%E2%80%98cry-help%E2%80%99-prisoner-chinese-forced-labour-jail-alleged-have-been-found-inside-primark

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) 12:35, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Primark. 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/20150502100506/http://www.abf.co.uk/responsibility/our-actions/primark_ethical_trade_team to http://www.abf.co.uk/responsibility/our-actions/primark_ethical_trade_team

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) 03:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Rita Ora X Primark
There is no mention of Rita Ora X Primark. -- Red rose64 🌹 (talk) 22:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Primark


text: File:Prince - The Beautiful Experience.jpg

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


text:
Regional Services Department

Regional Services Department was a government department in Hong Kong, under the Broadcasting, Culture and Sport Branch. It carried out the policies and managed the facilities of the former Regional Council. After being abolished with the Regional Council in 1999, its functions were inherited by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department and the Leisure and Cultural Services Department.

title: Regional Services Department


text:
Harter Fell (Mardale)

Harter Fell is a fell in the far eastern part of the English Lake District. The summit at lies the meeting point of three ridges, and Harter Fell forms the head of three valleys: Mardale, Longsleddale and the valley of the River Kent.

Topography
In plan section the summit area forms a horseshoe, open to the south east. This ridge is narrow and grassy, with a relatively new fence in place. There are subsidiary tops on both horns of the horseshoe. The southern ridge passes over The Knowe and then Brown Howe, before connecting to Kentmere Pike. The eastern branch includes the rocky top of Little Harter Fell (2234 ft), and Adam Seat (2185 ft) which is marked by a prominent boundary stone. This ridge continues down to Gatescarth Pass before rising again to Branstree.

Connecting to the centre of the summit horseshoe, producing a shape not unlike a tuning fork in plan, is Harter Fell's third ridge. This starts lower down the fell-side and cannot be seen from the summit. This ridge is all together rockier in character and leads swiftly down to Nan Bield Pass for onward connections to Mardale Ill Bell and High Street.

The western slopes of the fell above Kentmere Reservoir are moderately steep, with an area of historic landslip surrounding Dry Gill. A low subsidiary ridge juts out into Kentmere, separating it from the valley of Ullstone Gill. This is named for The Ullstone, a prominent erratic boulder.

The summit horseshoe of Harter Fell forms the head of Wren Gill, the main headwater of the River Sprint in Longsleddale. At Wrengill Quarry near the base of the slope, the Gill drops into sinkholes, reappearing from the ground a few yards lower down. The slopes on this south eastern side of the fell are gentle and generally grassy.

To the north above the head of Mardale, Harter Fell shows a different character. Extensive crags, unnamed on Ordnance Survey maps, drop 1300 ft to the valley. Further crags fringe the descending ridge to Nan Bield. Below these is the beautiful mountain tarn of Small Water. This corrie tarn, with a depth of around 50 ft has brown trout and perch.

Ascents
The walkers' passes of Nan Bield and Gatescarth provided historic trade routes from Mardale to Kentmere and Longsleddale respectively. With the submergence of Mardale Green village beneath Haweswater reservoir in the 1940s, their original purpose has died, but both routes still provide good access for fellwalkers and are the easiest ways onto Harter Fell. The upper sections still bear the original zig-zags over steep ground. The fell is most frequently climbed from Mardale, as there is road access along the shore of Haweswater. Harter Fell summit is 1 mile southwest and 1800 ft above the carpark at the head of the reservoir. Crags block a direct ascent, however, and Harter Fell is thus normally climbed via Gatescarth Pass to the east of the summit, or Nan Bield Pass to the west. These two passes also provide the easiest access from Kentmere or Longsleddale.

A longer route from the Kent valley follows the ridge that separates it from Longsleddale, taking in Kentmere Pike on the way. This may form part of the Kentmere Horseshoe walk which also includes the Ill Bell ridge. An ascent of Harter Fell may also be combined with fells such as Branstree, Mardale Ill Bell and High Street to form a high-level circuit of Mardale from the road end. Finally, direct ascents from Longsleddale can also be made up the grassy slopes above Wrengill Quarry.

Summit
As well as a pile of stones, the summit cairn of Harter Fell carries many pieces of ironwork salvaged from the fence. Some of these resemble upended pitchforks, and when encountered unexpectedly on a misty day, the effect is faintly nightmarish. A second cairn to the north carries similar decoration. The view is good all round and can be improved by moving to the rim of the crags, bringing the full length of Haweswater into sight.

Listing
Harter Fell was originally listed as a Marilyn in Alan Dawson's The Relative Hills of Britain, but it was later found not to have the required 150 m of relative height, missing out by 1 metre.

title: Harter Fell (Mardale)


text:
IF Fløya

Idrettsforeningen Fløya is a Norwegian football club from the city of Tromsø. The club was founded on 22 June 1922 and named after the Fløya mountain which overlooks Tromsø centre.

The women's team has got two third-place finishes in Toppserien, in 2004 and 2005, as its best ever achievements. On 16 December 2020, the women's team merged with Tromsø IL under the name of TIL 2020. The new name was taken into effect starting from the 2022 season.

The men's team plays in the Norwegian Third Division, the fourth tier in the Norwegian football league system. The famous Norwegian striker Rune Lange started his career in IF Fløya.

Women's seasons

 * {|class="wikitable"

! Season ! ! Pos. ! Pl. ! W ! D ! L ! GS ! GA ! P !Cup !Notes
 * -bgcolor="#efefef"
 * 2005
 * Toppserien
 * align=right bgcolor=cc9966|3
 * align=right|18||align=right|10||align=right|3||align=right|5
 * align=right|49||align=right|27||align=right|33
 * Quarter-final
 * 2006
 * Toppserien
 * align=right |7
 * align=right|18||align=right|4||align=right|2||align=right|12
 * align=right|24||align=right|57||align=right|14
 * Semi-final
 * 2007
 * Toppserien
 * align=right |9
 * align=right|22||align=right|7||align=right|4||align=right|11
 * align=right|36||align=right|52||align=right|25
 * Quarter-final
 * 2008
 * Toppserien
 * align=right |7
 * align=right|22||align=right|9||align=right|3||align=right|10
 * align=right|41||align=right|39||align=right|30
 * Quarter-final
 * 2009
 * Toppserien
 * align=right |8
 * align=right|22||align=right|7||align=right|4||align=right|11
 * align=right|36||align=right|37||align=right|25
 * Quarter-final
 * 2010
 * Toppserien
 * align=right bgcolor="#FFCCCC"| 12
 * align=right|22||align=right|1||align=right|3||align=right|18
 * align=right|15||align=right|66||align=right|6
 * Quarter-final
 * Relegated
 * 2011
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |3
 * align=right|20||align=right|10||align=right|5||align=right|5
 * align=right|43||align=right|26||align=right|35
 * 1st round
 * 2012
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |6
 * align=right|22||align=right|11||align=right|1||align=right|10
 * align=right|44||align=right|37||align=right|34
 * 3rd round
 * 2013
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |6
 * align="right" |20|| align="right" |9||align=right|2|| align="right" |9
 * align="right" |50|| align="right" |43||align=right|29
 * 3rd round
 * 2014
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right bgcolor="#FFCCCC"| 12
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |1||align=right|6|| align="right" |15
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |56||align=right|9
 * 2nd round
 * Relegated
 * 2015
 * 2. divisjon
 * align=right bgcolor=#DDFFDD| 1
 * align="right" |14|| align="right" |12||align=right|1|| align="right" |1
 * align="right" |61|| align="right" |7||align=right|37
 * 2nd round
 * Promoted
 * 2016
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |4
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |12||align=right|3|| align="right" |7
 * align="right" |55|| align="right" |33||align=right|39
 * 3rd round
 * 2017
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |7
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |8||align=right|4|| align="right" |10
 * align="right" |37|| align="right" |36||align=right|28
 * 2nd round
 * 2018
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |7
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |8||align=right|5|| align="right" |9
 * align="right" |37|| align="right" |40||align=right|29
 * 3rd round
 * 2019
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |1
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |15||align=right|2|| align="right" |5
 * align="right" |62|| align="right" |30||align=right|47
 * 3rd round
 * 2020
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |9
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |1||align=right|3|| align="right" |14
 * align="right" |19|| align="right" |55||align=right|6
 * 1st round
 * 2021
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |5
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |7||align=right|3|| align="right" |8
 * align="right" |31|| align="right" |27||align=right|24
 * Quarter-final
 * }
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |7
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |8||align=right|5|| align="right" |9
 * align="right" |37|| align="right" |40||align=right|29
 * 3rd round
 * 2019
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |1
 * align="right" |22|| align="right" |15||align=right|2|| align="right" |5
 * align="right" |62|| align="right" |30||align=right|47
 * 3rd round
 * 2020
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |9
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |1||align=right|3|| align="right" |14
 * align="right" |19|| align="right" |55||align=right|6
 * 1st round
 * 2021
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |5
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |7||align=right|3|| align="right" |8
 * align="right" |31|| align="right" |27||align=right|24
 * Quarter-final
 * }
 * 1. divisjon
 * align=right |5
 * align="right" |18|| align="right" |7||align=right|3|| align="right" |8
 * align="right" |31|| align="right" |27||align=right|24
 * Quarter-final
 * }
 * }

Men's seasons

 * {|class="wikitable"

! Season ! ! Pos. ! Pl. ! W ! D ! L ! GS ! GA ! P !Cup !Notes
 * -bgcolor="#efefef"
 * 2011
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right |5
 * align=right|22||align=right|11||align=right|2||align=right|9
 * align=right|62||align=right|58||align=right|35
 * First round
 * 2012
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right |2
 * align=right|22||align=right|16||align=right|2||align=right|4
 * align=right|103||align=right|28||align=right|50
 * Second qual. round
 * 2013
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right |2
 * align=right|22||align=right|15||align=right|2||align=right|5
 * align=right|68||align=right|30||align=right|47
 * Second round
 * 2014
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right |2
 * align=right|22||align=right|15||align=right|4||align=right|3
 * align=right|63||align=right|23||align=right|49
 * First round
 * 2015
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right |3
 * align=right|22||align=right|14||align=right|1||align=right|7
 * align=right|59||align=right|32||align=right|43
 * Second round
 * 2016
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right| 1
 * align=right|22||align=right|18||align=right|2||align=right|2
 * align=right|82||align=right|23||align=right|56
 * First round
 * 2017
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right| 8
 * align=right|26||align=right|9||align=right|8||align=right|9
 * align=right|42||align=right|39||align=right|36
 * Third round
 * 2018
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right| 4
 * align=right|26||align=right|14||align=right|5||align=right|7
 * align=right|56||align=right|35||align=right|47
 * First round
 * 2019
 * 3. divisjon
 * align=right bgcolor=#DDFFDD| 1
 * align=right|26||align=right|18||align=right|2||align=right|6
 * align=right|75||align=right|40||align=right|56
 * Second round
 * Promoted
 * 2020
 * 2. divisjon
 * align=right| 14
 * align=right|13||align=right|0||align=right|1||align=right|12
 * align=right|10||align=right|54||align=right|1
 * Cancelled
 * 2021
 * 2. divisjon
 * align=right bgcolor="#FFCCCC"| 13
 * align=right|26||align=right|2||align=right|8||align=right|16
 * align=right|29||align=right|72||align=right|14
 * Second round
 * Relegated
 * }
 * align=right|75||align=right|40||align=right|56
 * Second round
 * Promoted
 * 2020
 * 2. divisjon
 * align=right| 14
 * align=right|13||align=right|0||align=right|1||align=right|12
 * align=right|10||align=right|54||align=right|1
 * Cancelled
 * 2021
 * 2. divisjon
 * align=right bgcolor="#FFCCCC"| 13
 * align=right|26||align=right|2||align=right|8||align=right|16
 * align=right|29||align=right|72||align=right|14
 * Second round
 * Relegated
 * }
 * Second round
 * Relegated
 * }

Honours

 * Men
 * Northern Norwegian Cup: 1936
 * Women
 * Toppserien bronze: 2004, 2005

title: IF Fløya


text:
Template talk:Battle of Normandy

Untitled
Why does Pointe du Hoc get its own entry as a 'landing point' and not some of the other small landings? Would it not be simpler to restrict the landing points to the five main beaches? DJ Clayworth 16:06, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Normandy leaders?
could someone link The Battle of Normandy leaders into the template, if they think it belongs there? I'm too chicken to do it myself.... --Alvestrand 21:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed Operation Skye from this template. It's a tiny sub-part of a part of the deception operation, and linked to from the larger operations. DJ Clayworth 21:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

this is an awfully us-uk biaised view
it lacks all fights of the french resistance... what about the famous Maquis des Glières, fr:Maquis du Vercors? and french resistance vs german battles like the fr:Bataille du Mont Gargan (Battle of Mont Gargan) involving the 2nd SS Division Das Reich. Paris By Night 14:09, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I suppose it is likely due to Americans editing this template. I am sure that it is not biased by design.  Please feel free to add to this template the battles you are referring to.  I would expect that the users would appreciate such an addition. Odcdtd45 14:36, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Hi! I am the original designer and this template still looks pretty much the same as when I created it. Regarding the us-uk bias I must state that this was certainly not my intention. I am from Sweden, and we were neutral..:) So, I also suggest that people who want to include resistance stuff are bold and do so, in reasonable proportion. My regards, --Dna-Dennistalk - contribs 01:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Update
I have updated the template to link to a few more operations, which were missed including a few UK and Candians ones as well as the only German one that i know of.

I have removed some of the towns as well as they are covered in some of the other articles i.e. Caen --EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 10:23, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Convert to collapsible
Can someone please convert this to collabsible form? I'd do it myself, but I really don't have sufficient knowledge of navbox construction, and I'm afraid I'd screw it up. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz)  (talk / cont)  23:11, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

title: Template talk:Battle of Normandy


text:
Northern Patagonian Ice Field

The Northern Patagonian Ice Field, located in southern Chile, is the smaller of two remnant parts in which the Patagonian Ice Sheet in the Andes Mountains of southern South America can be divided. It is completely contained within the boundaries of Laguna San Rafael National Park.

Description
The Northern Patagonian Ice Field is a vestige of the Patagonian Ice Sheet, an extensive ice sheet that covered all of Chilean Patagonia and the westernmost parts of Argentine Patagonia during the Quaternary glaciations. Today, with its glaciers largely in retreat and only an area of 4,200 km2, it is still the second largest continuous mass of ice outside of the polar regions. Its survival depends on its elevation (1,100 to 1500 m), favorable terrain and a cool, moist, oceanic climate. The ice field has 28 exit glaciers, the largest two — San Quintin and San Rafael — nearly reach sea level to the west at the Pacific Ocean. Smaller exit glaciers, like San Valentín and Nef, feed numerous rivers and glacially carved lakes to the east.

Eric Shipton accompanied by Spaniard Miguel Gómez and Chileans Eduardo García and Cedomir Marangunic crossed the icecap from the San Raphael Glacier into Argentina in the summer of 1963–64. In 1972/73 a Joint Services expedition led by Captain CH Agnew of Lochnaw yr, now Sir Crispin Agnew of Lochnaw, spent 5 months carrying out scientific research on and around the ice cap, including on the Benito Glacier, and three members of the expedition carried out a north-to-south crossing from the foot of Monte San Valentín down to the snout of the Steffen Glacier. Martin Session, the glaciologist on the 1972/3 expedition returned to the Benito Glacier with others in 2007 and 2011 to continue his research.

The Northern Patagonian Ice Field lies in fault-bounded crustal block that has been uplifted. To the west lies the Liquiñe-Ofqui Fault Zone, to the north the Exploradores Fault Zone and to the east the Cachet Fault. To the south there is possibly a zone of extensional faults around Tortel Fjord.

title: Northern Patagonian Ice Field


text:
A Rose for Emily

"A Rose for Emily" is a short story by American author William Faulkner, first published on April 30, 1930, in an issue of The Forum. The story takes place in Faulkner's fictional Jefferson, Mississippi, in the equally fictional county of Yoknapatawpha. It was Faulkner's first short story published in a national magazine.

Title
Faulkner described the title "A Rose for Emily" as an allegorical title: this woman had undergone a great tragedy, and for this Faulkner pitied her. As a salute, he handed her a rose. The exact meaning of the word "rose" in the title in relation to the story, however, remains open to debate; no actual rose appears in the story.

Plot summary
The story opens with a brief fourth-person account of the funeral of Emily Grierson, an elderly Southern woman whose funeral is the obligation of the town. It then proceeds in a non-linear fashion to the narrator's recollections of Emily's archaic, and increasingly strange, behavior throughout the years. Emily is a member of a family of the antebellum Southern aristocracy. After the Civil War, the family falls into hard times. She and her father are the last two survivors of that branch of the family. Emily's father refuses to allow her to marry. Her father dies when Emily is on the cusp of her 30th birthday, which takes her by surprise. For several days, she refuses to give up his corpse, insisting he is not dead. The townspeople write it off as her grieving process. They pity Emily for losing her father but also for his not having allowed her to marry. Emily depended heavily on her father, believing he would never leave her; he was all she had.

After her father's death, the only person seen moving about Emily's home is Tobe, a black man serving as Emily's butler. He is frequently seen entering and exiting the house for groceries. Although the reclusive Emily does not have a strong relationship with the town, she opens her home to give art lessons to local children, doing so out of need for an income. She teaches until she is 40. With the acceptance of her father's death, Emily somewhat revives, even changing the style of her hair, and becomes friendly with Homer Barron, a laborer from the North who comes to town shortly after Mr. Grierson's death. The connection surprises some of the community, while others are glad she is taking an interest. However, it is stated that Homer "liked men, and it was known that he drank with younger men at the Elks' Club — that he was not a marrying man", which draws attention to Homer's sexuality but it is unclear whether he is homosexual or simply has more interest in drinking and carousing than in marrying Emily. Emily buys arsenic from the town's druggist. When the druggist says the law requires him to ask customers why they want poisons Emily refuses to disclose it; the druggist chalks it up to a rat infestation in her home. Some townspeople are convinced that she will use it to poison herself. Emily's distant cousins are called into town by the minister's wife to supervise Miss Emily and Homer Barron. Emily is seen in town buying wedding presents for Homer, including a monogrammed toilet set. Homer leaves town for some time reputedly to give Emily a chance to get rid of her cousins, and returns three days later after the cousins have left. After he is observed entering Miss Emily's home one evening, Homer is never seen again, leading the townsfolk to believe he ran off.

Despite these turnabouts in her social status, Emily continues to behave mysteriously as she had before her father died. Her reputation is such that the city council finds itself unable to confront her about a strong smell that has begun to emanate from the house. They believed Tobe was unable to maintain the house and something was rotting. Instead, the council decides to send men to her house under the cover of darkness to sprinkle lime around the house, after which the smell dissipates. The mayor of the town, Colonel Sartoris, makes a gentleman's agreement to overlook her taxes as an act of charity, though it is done under a pretense of repayment towards her father, to assuage Emily's pride after her father's death. Years later, a new generation has come to power in the county. Having no ties to Colonel Sartoris or Mr. Grierson, they approach Emily about being subject to taxation. Emily insists on maintaining this informal arrangement, flatly denying she owes any taxes, stating "I have no taxes in Jefferson." After this, the council declines to press the issue due to her obduracy. Emily has become a recluse: she is never seen outside of the house, and only rarely accepts people into it. The community eventually comes to view her as a "hereditary obligation" on the town, who must be humored and tolerated.

The funeral is a large affair: Emily has become an institution, so her death sparks a great deal of curiosity about her reclusive nature and what remains of her house. After she is buried, a group of townsfolk enters her house to see what remains of her life there. Tobe walks out of the house and is never seen again, giving the townspeople access to Miss Emily's home. The door to her upstairs bedroom is locked. Some of the townsfolk break down the door to see what has been hidden for so long. Inside, among the gifts that Emily had bought for Homer, lies the decomposed corpse of Homer Barron on the bed. On the pillow beside him is the indentation of a head and a single strand of gray hair, indicating that Emily had slept with Homer's corpse. The house is an indicator revealing how Emily struggled to keep everything the same, in a frozen time period, avoiding change.

Characters
Emily Grierson - The main character of the story. Her father kept her from seeing suitors and controlled her social life, keeping her in isolation until his death, when she is 30 years old. Her struggle with loss and attachment is the impetus for the plot, driving her to kill Homer Barron, the man assumed to have married her. She poisons and kills Homer as she sees this as the only way to keep Homer with her permanently. She treats him as her living husband even after his death, which is shown by her keeping his clothes in the room, keeping his engraved wedding items on the dresser, and the strand of her hair found beside his corpse at the end of the story that indicated she even slept beside him.

Homer Barron - Emily's romantic interest. He is later found dead and decomposed in Emily's bedroom after her funeral. He initially enters the story as a foreman for a road construction project occurring in the town. He is soon seen to be with Emily in her Sunday carriage rides, and it is expected for them to be married. Homer differs from the rest of the town because he is a Northerner. The story takes place in the South shortly after the Civil War, and while Homer is not necessarily unwelcome to the town, he does stand out. This, along with the fact that he is seemingly courting Emily, sets him apart from all of the other characters in the story. It is because he is an outlier that Emily becomes attracted to him. It is unknown if Homer fully reciprocates the romantic feelings Emily has for him. It is stated in the story that Homer likes men and is "not the marrying kind" and has commitment issues.

The Narrator - Unnamed. A presumed townsperson who watches the events of Emily's life unfold in its entirety. The story is presented to the reader in a non-chronological order; this suggests that the story may have been patched together by multiple tellers. Some parts of the story are repeated, such as Homer's disappearance, the idea that Emily and Homer will get married, and Emily's refusal to pay taxes, also indicating that the narrator is a voice for the town.

Colonel Sartoris - The former mayor who remitted Emily's taxes. While he is in the story very little, his decision to remit Emily's taxes leads to her refusal to pay them ever again, contributing to her stubborn personality. The reason for Sartoris remitting her taxes is never given, only that he told Emily it was because her father loaned the money to the town.

Mr. Grierson - Emily's father, the patriarchal head of the Grierson family. His control over Emily's personal life prohibited her from romantic involvement. The reason for his refusal to let Emily court men is not explained in the story. Whatever the reason, Mr. Grierson shapes the person that Emily becomes. His decision to ban all men from her life drives her to kill the first man she is attracted to and can be with, Homer Barron, to keep him with her permanently.

The cousins - Emily's extended relatives from Alabama. They come to town during Emily's courting of Homer Barron to check on Emily's well-being. They are thought of as even more uptight and stuffy than Emily by the townspeople. They are called in to prevent Emily and Homer from marrying; however, they are later sent back home so that the two can be wed. It is speculated that there may be some type of dispute between Emily and the cousins, indicated by them living far away from Emily and the fact that they did not attend Emily's father's funeral.

Tobe - Emily's cook/gardener, who also acts as her family retainer. Tobe was loyal to Emily during her life and zealously respected her privacy. During the years of her isolation, he provided no details of her life to the townspeople. He promptly disappears directly following her death. He became old and stooped from all his work while Emily grew obese and immobile.

Structure
Faulkner tells the story using two different methods: a series of flashbacks in which the events are told with subjectivity and detail, and from an objective perspective in which the narrator fades into a plural pronoun "we" to demonstrate a linear causality of events. Had the story been told in a linear fashion, this understanding would, perhaps, have been lost, something Faulkner knew and incorporated into the story. By presenting the story in terms of present and past events, he could examine how they influence each other. In terms of mathematical precision, time moves on and what exists is only the present. In terms of the more subjective time, time moves on but memories can exist no matter how much time changes. Those memories stay unhindered.

It starts with the announcement of Emily's death, an event that has the entire town talking. This leads the reader to assume that she was an important figure in the town. As Fassler says in his article The Key, “Clearly, this lady who died unmarried was of importance to everyone. And yet the town itself is eventually divided”, by upsetting the linear flow of the chronology of the narration, the short story focuses on the minute details that lead to different conclusions towards the end of the story. If Faulkner presented the story in a linear fashion, the chances of the reader sympathizing with Emily would be far less. By telling the story out of order, the reader sees Emily as a tragic product of her environment rather than a twisted necrophiliac. The reader discovers the town was not dreading Emily's death. Some are sad but most relieved. Emily, after all, was just a "hereditary obligation" who was desperately trying to cling to old traditions and ways of life.

Themes
"A Rose for Emily" discusses many dark themes that characterized the Old South and Southern Gothic fiction.

The story explores themes of death and resistance to change. Also, it reflects the decaying of the societal tenets of the South in the 1930s. Emily Grierson had been controlled by her overbearing father for the first 30 years of her life and she had never questioned it. Once her father had passed, Emily, in denial, refused to give his corpse up for burial—this shows her inability to functionally adapt to change. When the present mayor and aldermen insist Miss Emily pay the taxes which she had been exempted from, she refuses and continues to live in her house. Miss Emily's stubborn insistence that she "pays no taxes in Jefferson" and her mistaking the new mayor for Colonel Sartoris brings into question whether her acts of resistance are a conscious act of defiance or a result of decayed mental stability. The reader is only shown Emily from an external perspective, we can not ascertain whether she acts rationally. The death of Homer, if interpreted as a murder, can be seen in the context of the north–south clash. Homer, notably a northerner, is not one for the tradition of marriage. In the framework that his death was not an accident, but a murder on the part of Emily, Homer's rejection of the marriage can be seen as the North's rejection of Southern tradition. The South ends its relations with the North in retaliation. Emily continuing to sleep next to Homer's body can be seen as the south holding on to an ideal that is no longer feasible.

Control and its repercussions are a persistent theme throughout the story. Emily's father was an intimidating and manipulative figure, keeping her from experiencing life on her terms. She was never able to grow, learn, live her life, start a family, and marry the one she truly loved. Even after Emily's father died, his presence and impact on his daughter were still apparent. Discussing Emily and her father, the townspeople said "We had long thought of them as a tableau, Miss Emily a slender figure in white in the background, her father a spraddled silhouette in the foreground, his back to her and clutching a horsewhip, the two of them framed by the back-flung front door". Emily is portrayed as small and powerless, placed behind the overbearing frame of her father. She wears white, a symbol of innocence and purity. Emily falls victim to the ruling hand of her father and her place in the society: she has to uphold the noblesse oblige into which she was born. In this way, her father's influence remains after he has passed. This control leads to Emily's isolation, both externally and internally imposed. Emily is alone, yet always being watched by the townspeople; she is both apart from and a part of the community. Her position prevents her from ever finding happiness.

The power of death is a consistent theme throughout the story. Emily herself is portrayed as a "skeleton" that is both "small and spare" which is representative of the fact that she emanates death. When it comes to death itself Emily is in denial, most of that feeling has to do with her loneliness. After her father dies, she keeps his corpse for three days and refuses to admit that he is dead before surrendering his body for burial. The reader also sees this with the corpse of Homer Barron, except she is the one who inflicts death upon him. She poisons him and keeps him locked away in her room; she did not want to lose the only other person she had ever loved, so she made his stay permanent. These examples show that the power of death triumphs over everything, including "poor Emily", herself.

Due to this inevitability in the portrayal of death, "A Rose for Emily" is seen as a tale based on determinism, making the short story part of the naturalism literary movement. Here, a character's fate is already determined no matter how much the individual struggles to change it. There are impersonal forces of nature that prevent him or her from taking control. As the very universe itself appears indifferent, this character descends into an inevitable death and decay. The case of Emily is the same. Insanity ran in her family and it is possible her father's motives for keeping her from marrying were to end this genetic blight. This is a more charitable interpretation of Mr. Grierson (and his actions) than is normally imputed to him. No matter what she did, there was the implication that she would ultimately go mad. There was also the depiction of a cursed land due to slavery and the class structure based upon it. No matter how those who clung to the glorious past soldiered on, it was a tarnished way of life that led to ruin to those who clung to it.

Critical response
The story has been discussed and analyzed in a variety of academic publications.

Floyd C. Watkins wrote about the structure of "A Rose for Emily" in Modern Language Notes. Faulkner had to carefully dissect his sections, bringing importance to every aspect of Emily's life. Watkins sees this as a "structural problem" but later praises the symmetry of this short story. Watkins enjoys this story in its entirety, and is impressed by Faulkner's ordering, as building suspense was an important aspect in the response.

The critical response by John Skinner explores the interpretations of Faulkner's short story in detail while reviewing the importance of over-analyzing a piece of literary work. Faulkner published this story in the 1930s. Skinner had published his critical response in 1985. The characters and theme of this tale have been scrutinized by many. Some scholars, including S.W. M. Johnson, posit that “Emily represented a refusal to submit to, or even concede, to the inevitability of change”. Whereas, William Going pictures Emily as a rose, “the treasured memory of the Confederate veterans”. The point of view according to Skinner is of immediate relevance to the story as the chief character, the narrator tells the chronology of the story. This narrator gives approximately “round figures” for the important events of the accounts. Jack Scherting, in Studies in Short Fiction, discusses that point of view and points out that the story is "related by an anonymous narrator in the first person plural."

Alice Petry introduces a different type of critical response that is not focused on the usual subjects. Rather, she focuses on complex and provocative language. For example, Hall discusses how the sentence, "Thus she passed from generation to generation - dear, inescapable, impervious, tranquil and perverse" has been considered misleading, but is in fact strategically placed to provide foreshadowing and unification of plot. The five descriptive words used in the sentence each correspond to one of the five parts in the order they are seen. For example, the adjective "inescapable" corresponds to Part II, to the incident of the strange smell coming from Miss Emily's home. Faulkner's placement of these adjectives at the end of Part IV serves as an important unifying sentence that connects all five parts to each other.

Jim Barloon of the University of St. Thomas wrote about an idea introduced to him by his students, that Homer was homosexual, possibly providing another reason for his murder. He proposes that Emily did not kill Homer because of her own insecurities, but also because he did not reciprocate her romantic feelings. As Barloon states in his article, “Positing that Homer Barron is gay not only raises a new set of questions but transforms [the story], or at least our perspective of it.”

The psychology of Emily Grierson has been analyzed countless times, with many people concluding that she was mentally ill, and from that point, the reasons why. Though many different diagnoses have been made, the most common can be summarized as follows by Nicole Smith in her psychological analysis of the character: “It is reasonable to propose that Miss Emily developed [schizophrenia] as a response to the demanding conditions in which she was living as a Southern woman from an aristocratic family.”

Tuncay Tezcan in his analysis of the story states, “It represents the numerous conflicts in the main character's life, illustrating the effect of social change on the individual.” Jack Sherting believes Emily suffers from an Oedipus complex. He claims that Emily and her father had an incestuous relationship and she was never able to move past it. Sherting believes Emily used Homer as a replacement for her father and never truly loved him, only used him for her own benefit.

Adaptations

 * A Rose for Emily—PBS adaptation with Anjelica Huston.
 * My Chemical Romance's song "To The End", from their 2004 album Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge, loosely retells the story of Homer and Miss Emily.
 * The Zombies' song "A Rose for Emily" retells the story, and is about a strong theme present in the story: Miss Emily living and dying alone, unloved.
 * Andrea Camilleri has a similar theme in his novel The Scent of the Night influencing his character Detective Salvo Montalbano.

title: A Rose for Emily


text:
Shrewsbury Business Park

The Shrewsbury Business Park is a commercial development on the outskirts of Shrewsbury, Shropshire (at Emstrey). Construction commenced in late 2001 on the 30 acre, £25 million site, and is still ongoing. Almost 200,000 sqft of business premises have been delivered, largely attributed to Phase One of the scheme. Over 1,000 people are based there.

The idea was first promoted by local developer the Alaska Group, which entered into a partnership with Shropshire County Council. Mainly offices, the business park includes a Holiday Inn Express Hotel and a children's daycare centre. Plans exist for a cafe retail unit at the heart of the development.

Alaska Group was founded in London in 1994 in a former fur factory known as the Alaska Works, where skins were imported from Alaska. The company has no other connection with Alaska, however it gave the Park several place names from that State. The main route through the Park, Sitka Drive, is named after the State tree of Alaska. Other names include Anchorage Avenue, Mt McKinley Building, Bering House and Juneau House.

Located around 3 mi south east of the town centre of Shrewsbury, Shropshire's county town, the business park lies on the junction of the A5 bypass and the B4380, near to Emstrey. The park's appeal is partly thanks to excellent transport links via the nearby M54 motorway to Telford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham, while being near to a fine medieval town and beautiful countryside.

Other business park developments in and around the town include the Oxon Business Park to the West of the town centre and the Battlefield Enterprise Park to the North, and Abbey Lawn next to Shrewsbury Abbey, just across the Severn from the town centre.

Buildings

The park's buildings are a combination of fully customised modern and traditional structures, all with dedicated parking.

The Creative Quarter is home to five offices, The Alaska Building (Pictured Right), Global House, Mercury House, Jupiter House and the Community Council Building

Mtech's office, seen bottom right, is typical of some of the smaller properties available on the development.

The Professional Quarter is of more traditional brick design and includes professional clients including Handelsbanken.

Phase 2
Work started in 2008 on phase 2 of Shrewsbury Business Park after Alaska Group agreed a new Partnership with Shropshire Council, following the success of phase 1. Another 20,000 m2 is planned and the first three buildings are now nearing completion. Deutsche Bank are the first occupiers of phase 2.

title: Shrewsbury Business Park


text:
Cyril Hoyt

Cyril J. Hoyt (November 22, 1905 — December 16, 1979) was an American educator and academic. A long-time member of the University of Minnesota Department of Educational Psychology, he was known as the author of Hoyt's coefficient of reliability.

Hoyt's interest in the theory and practice of education developed during his teaching of mathematics and science for Minot Public Schools from 1928 to 1937. He became closely involved in educational research while pursuing higher degrees at the University of Minnesota. The generalization of the Kuder-Richardson's (1937) formulation of the coefficient of internal consistency reliability to a continuous case is often ascribed to Lee Cronbach (1951), despite the fact that Hoyt had already made this generalization a decade earlier. Hoyt retired in 1974.

References (in chronological order)

 * Kuder, G. & Richardson, M. (1937). The theory of estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika, 2, 151–160.
 * Hoyt, C. (1941). Test reliability estimated by analysis of variance. Psychometrika, 6, 153-160
 * Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–333.

Specific

title: Cyril Hoyt


text: User talk:83.28.22.7

title: User talk:83.28.22.7


text:
User:Serendipodous

Formerly Serendipitous; I have learned the hard way what happens when you don't specify an email and then forget your password. I've taken a shine to my misspelled name though. I would consider myself lucky-footed.

I am a former student of early modern literature living in London. I have a Masters degree in Research.

My particular interests are astronomy (particularly planetary astronomy) mythology (particularly Germanic mythology) and folklore. Over time I have become a major contributor to the Solar System Wikiproject. I also have worked substantially on the pages for many works of modern fantasy, particularly Harry Potter and Discworld. I keep watch on a number of pseudoscientific articles, mainly out of fear of what would happen if I didn't. I began the articles on the definition of planet and galactic tide (though I cannot take credit for the latter's current form). My current focus is the Top 25 Report, an examination of the most popular Wikipedia pages of the week, which was spun off into the Traffic Report on The Signpost

My Wiki philosophy? Well, my main principle is that it is not the job of the reader to interpret what we write; it is our job to put our point across as clearly and simply as possible. I'm not sure I like Wikipedia very much, but I think it has moved beyond such concerns; now that it has become Google's first page for practically any reference query, and now that, because mirrors have now metasticised it across the web in multifarious guises, it cannot be shut down, the only option left is to ensure that it is as accurate as possible.

As regards the future of this project, I think the major threat facing Wikipedia is the declining number of editors, which is a direct result of the inhospitable environment that Wikipedia presents to new users. It's got to the point where people honestly don't even know that they could edit Wikipedia if they wanted. What is required is a space for new editors to feel welcome, one that embraces broadband and uses friendly faces and voices to guide them through the warzone that is this site. If we don't do this, Wikipedia will fade away into irrelevance. It's shocking that a Youtube video is required to do what we should be doing.

I've recently begun a Youtube channel that allows me to explore some of the topics I curate on Wikipedia with more freedom.

Caption

Toolbox

 * Reddit gate
 * Contribution checker
 * Traffic checkers: edits; editors; viewers:
 * overall
 * TopViews

Vanity closet
I get into a great many Wiki-arguments. I'm not sure if this is because I meet a lot of argumentative people or just because I'm argumentative. Anyway, I started listing all my Wiki-accomplishments after one too many wikifights, because I felt I needed some way for other editors to take me seriously. Of course, this might just lead those same other editors to conclude that I'm an egocentric blusterer who really needs to get over himself, but what the heck.

 * Featured and good content

 * Barnstars Thank you! :-)

 * Lab: Experiments; mainly barnstar alternatives.

title: User:Serendipodous