text:
Parks and open spaces in the London Borough of Islington

The London Borough of Islington is short of large parks and open spaces, given its status in recent decades as a desirable place of residence. In fact, Islington has the lowest ratio of open space to built-up areas of any London borough. The largest continuous open space in the borough, at 11.75 hectares (29 acres), is Highbury Fields.

Islington has access to large open spaces in neighbouring London boroughs. The Islington district of Finsbury Park is next to the southern end of Finsbury Park, in Haringey. The "Green Route" of the Regent's Canal tow path provides access to Regent's Park to the west – in Camden; and Victoria Park to the east – in Tower Hamlets. Many other open spaces such as Clissold Park in Hackney are situated on the borders of the borough. Islington also contains many well-kept public squares and greens, such as Canonbury Square and Thornhill Square.

Because of the perceived open space deficit, many small community gardens grew up in Islington from the 1970s on. Created and maintained by local residents on sites made derelict by the Blitz and redevelopment, not all have survived, but one notable remaining example, open to the public, is Culpeper Community Garden, near the Angel.

List of open spaces

 * The Artillery Ground is an 3.2 hectare open space on the edge of the city. It has belonged to the Honourable Artillery Company since 1638. While it is not normally open to the public, the ground contains many sports facilities that are used by local schools
 * Barnard Park, 3.66 hectare
 * Bunhill Fields is a 3.2 hectare burial ground, adjacent to the Artillery Ground. It contains many dissenter burials, including Daniel Defoe, John Bunyan and William Blake. It is administered by the Corporation of London. Part contains historic graves; but part is laid to a pleasant and quiet park.
 * Caledonian Park, 7.40 hectare - on the site of the former Caledonian Cattle Market once the biggest cattle market in North London
 * Charterhouse Square, 0.80 hectare, former burial ground converted into a garden square
 * Claremont Square is a former reservoir that is closed to the public
 * Compton Terrace Garden, 0.38 hectare
 * Crouch Hill Park is located about halfway along the Parkland Walk
 * Duncan Terrace Gardens & Colebrook Row Gardens, 0.77 hectare
 * Elthorne Park, 2.45 hectare
 * Finsbury Square, 0.70 hectare
 * Fortune Street Park, 0.36 hectare
 * Freightliners City Farm is in Lower Holloway. This small urban farm contains a wide range of animals from rabbits to cows to chickens and pigs
 * Highbury Fields, 11.75 hectare
 * Islington Green, 0.32 hectare
 * Jewish Burial Ground, 0.51 hectare
 * Joseph Grimaldi Park, 0.51 hectare
 * King Square Gardens, 1.18 hectare, is a park in the St Luke's area
 * Laycock Street Open Space, 0.89 hectare
 * Market Road Gardens, 1.1 hectare. The Copenhagen Tunnel lies directly underneath.
 * New River Walk including Astey's Row Rock Gardens/Astey's Row Playground, 2.09 hectare is a linear walk that connects the Angel and Canonbury along the banks of the New River
 * Newington Green
 * Paradise Park, 1.85 hectare
 * The Parkland Walk is a linear park along the route of a disused railway line from Finsbury Park to Highgate Woods, a small part of which is in Islington with the rest being in Haringey
 * Petherton Green is a linear walk along the route of the New River, which was culverted and covered in 1868–70, and an avenue of trees and grass planted down the middle
 * The Regent's Canal enters the Islington Tunnel, near City Road Lock. A linear walk is marked through the streets and parks above the tunnel
 * Rosemary Gardens, 2.63 hectare
 * Spa Fields, 0.82 hectare
 * St Mary's Church Gardens (also known as Islington Parish Church), 0.69 hectare
 * St Mary Magdalene Gardens
 * Thornhill Gardens (also known as Thornhill Road Gardens), 0.28 hectare
 * Tufnell Park Playing Fields, 1.92 hectare
 * Whittington Park, 4.09 hectare
 * Wray Crescent, 2.13 hectare

Garden squares

 * Alwyne Square
 * Andersons Square
 * Arlington Square
 * Arundel Square
 * Barnsbury Square
 * Bartholomew Square
 * Canonbury Square
 * Charterhouse Square
 * Claremont Square
 * Cloudesley Square
 * Edward Square
 * Finsbury Square
 * Gibson Square
 * Granville Square
 * King Square
 * Lloyd Square
 * Lonsdale Square
 * Milner Square
 * Myddelton Square
 * Northampton Square
 * Percy Square
 * Thornhill Square
 * Tibberton Square
 * Union Square, Islington
 * Vernon Square
 * Wilmington Square
 * Wilton Square

Local Nature Reserves
There are three Local Nature Reserves in Islington, Gillespie Park (2.8 hectare), Barnsbury Wood (0.35 hectare), and the part of the Parkland Walk which is in the borough.


text:
Victoria Road, Hong Kong

Victoria Road is a main road near the west shore of Hong Kong Island in Hong Kong connecting Kennedy Town and Wah Fu and an alternative connection of Pok Fu Lam Road. It begins north with Belcher's Street in Kennedy Town and goes along Mount Davis, Sandy Bay, Telegraph Bay and Waterfall Bay and reaches in Kellett Bay.

History
The road opened in 1897, the year of Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee, celebrating the 60th year of her reign. A stone was laid by Governor Robinson and the road was named Victoria Jubilee Road (域多利慶典道). The road was without any surfacing and only access to Chinese public cemetery in Kellett Bay. In 1903, Hong Kong Government erected a stone at the road in Kennedy Town to mark the boundary of Victoria City. In the 1910s, the road was expanded and renamed to Victoria Road. In the 1960s, for the construction of Wah Fu Estate, the road became a standard road of concrete. In the 2000s, the section near Cyberport was improved.

Notable buildings

 * The medical faculty of the University of Hong Kong
 * Baguio Villa
 * Former Victoria Road Detention Centre aka. Mount Davis Concentration Camp (摩星嶺集中營), which was used by the Special Branch of the Royal Hong Kong Police Force to hold political prisoners during the 1967 Leftist riots. The compound is listed as a Grade III historic building. Currently the building has been renovated and has been integrated into the Hong Kong campus of the University of Chicago.
 * Villa Cecil, the residential complex home to billionaire Cecil Chao
 * Hong Kong Chinese Christian Churches Union Pok Fu Lam Road Cemetery, a cemetery is managed by The Hong Kong Chinese Christian Churches Union. It was built in 1882.

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

title: Victoria Road, Hong Kong


text:
Hawaiian Renaissance

The Hawaiian Renaissance (also called the Hawaiian Cultural Renaissance) was the Hawaiian resurgence of a distinct cultural identity that draws upon traditional Kānaka Maoli culture, with a significant divergence from the tourism-based culture which Hawaiʻi was previously known for worldwide (along with the rest of Polynesia). The Hawaiian Renaissance has been pointed to as a global model for biocultural restoration and sustainability.

First Hawaiian Renaissance

The First Hawaiian Renaissance had its foundation in the nationalist sentiments of King Kamehameha V. At the time Hawaii was an independent kingdom. The intention was to form a contemporary national identity rather than modeling Hawaii after Great Britain and the culture of the United States. King Kalākaua had a controversial rise to power due to the internal conflicts between family lineage. One half of the island wanted Kalākaua, whereas the other half cheered for his competitor. The result spread tension between the people themselves, but most came to favor Kalākaua as he brought back the Hawaiian culture to urban areas.

Kalākaua took steps to perpetuate nationalism. Kalākaua replaced the considerably Christian national anthem He Mele Lahui Hawaii with Hawaiʻi Ponoʻī in 1876 inspired by Kamehameha I. He had the aged ʻIolani Palace rebuilt starting in 1879 and finishing in 1882.

Despite early efforts to earn favor with the haole people, growing views he was putting his people over the others continued. The Hawaiian people loved him; however, the missionaries' descendants did not enjoy the dealings with Kalākaua. The missionaries' descendants had gained power in Hawai'i by buying land. They were influential enough on the island that they held advisory positions to Kalākaua, though the king didn't always agree with their opinions. He always put his people first, and that sometimes meant denying the missionaries' ideas.

Kalākaua spent three years planning his second coronation in 1883 to try and ease the racial tensions between the Hawaiians and the haoles, and 8,000 people attended. Kalākaua sponsored several traditional Hawaiian practices such as hula (which had been banned in 1830 by queen regent Kaʻahumanu as part of the effort to uproot Hawaiian traditional religion and impose Christanity on Hawaii ), chants, sports, and royal rituals. He also had Hawaiian myths, legends, and chants recorded in media such as the Kumulipo and had his genealogy traced.

Second Hawaiian Renaissance

The Second Hawaiian Renaissance is generally considered to have started in 1970, and drew from similar cultural movements from the late 1960s and early 1970s. It is mostly known from music, such as Gabby Pahinui and his work with the Sons of Hawaii, or Keola and Kapono Beamer's traditionalist slack-key music, and their signature twin-hole guitar designs constructed at the Guitar and Lute Workshop. Other noted Hawaiian musicians who played an integral role in the renaissance were Dennis Pavao, Ledward Kaʻapana, and Nedward Kaʻapana. The Kaʻapana brothers, along with cousin Pavao formed the falsetto trio, Hui ʻOhana. The musical group "Olomana" contributed greatly to the music of this period with songs like 'O Malia' and 'Mele O Kahoolawe'.

This period in Hawaiian history is also associated with a renewed interest in Hawaiian language, Pidgin, Hula, Traditional Hawaiian Crafts, Hawaiian Studies, and other cultural items.

This period of increase in Hawaiian self-identity was inspired by the 1964 essay "On Being Hawaiian" by writer John Dominis Holt, IV, who brought pride back to being Hawaiian after decades of negative stereotype.

The Merrie Monarch Festival, established in 1964 by Helene Hale, caused a resurgence in the study and practice of ancient hula that had been developed and danced before 1893.

The era also included intense land struggles such as that of Kalama Valley, Kahoʻolawe and Waiāhole-Waikāne, and a resurgence of traditional practices such as loʻi kalo (taro patch) farming, folk arts, and mālama ʻāina (traditional forestry/ land healing and restoration).

Polynesian voyaging is also a large aspect of the Hawaiian Renaissance. In 1975, the Polynesian Voyaging Society built a replica of an ancient Polynesian voyaging canoe. The vessel, Hōkūleʻa, and the re-adoption of non-instrument wayfinding navigation, Hokule'a and creator and first navigator of Hokulea in 1976, Ben Finney are icons of the Hawaiian Renaissance and contributors to the resurgence of interest in Polynesian culture.

The movement sometimes touches upon politics, including issues dealing with Native Hawaiians and restoration of Hawaiian independence. Amongst the outcomes was the Constitution of 1978, which produced the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and reclaiming federal land to the State like Kahoolawe.

The height of the Hawaiian Renaissance is usually located during the 1970s, and had mostly waned by 1980, although some refer to it as a still-contemporary movement.

title: Hawaiian Renaissance


text:
Talk:Purity ring

Pop references
Since the whole Disney Channel thing I heard a lot about purity rings in the media. I was wondering whether we should include any pop references - for example, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3OO5QTox-A. i heard Ryan Seacrest also did one too. ChasiseGirl (talk) 10:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

History
What is the history of the term? Or it is simply a modern marketing ploy? mikka (t) 17:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Really?!! Am I mistaken, or is this a very recent phenomenon, restricted to some American Christians? Shouldn't there be something in the article that explains how widespread this is, how long it has been going on, who is doing it? The first line says that they are a "symbol of virginity in religious cultures". Is that really an accurate statement?

Steve Lowther 09:23, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I ran around and checked a lot of the related articles and came up with some answers to the obvious questions. I tweaked the language a bit too, just to make it sound a little more encyclopedic.

Steve Lowther 06:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't edit myself... don't have the time... but some eager soul might find this useful:

From: http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/8-19-2005-75134.asp

When one thinks of a promise ring it is common to think of a small, inexpensive ring given to a woman as a promise of marriage in the future; however, this is not always the case. A promise ring has several other purposes besides being a pre-engagement ring. A promise ring can be given or used for any sign of commitment. The following are some other common uses for a promise ring.

A Non-Romantic Promise Between Friends

A promise ring can be given as a sign of a promise between two friends. Such a ring can be given to a special friend, to a friend who is moving far away, or even to a friend who you will not see for awhile. A friendship promise ring is very common with young girls who get matching rings that say "best friends forever." A promise ring between two friends is a way of showing that a certain friendship is something very special to you.

A Promise of To Be Chaste

Also called a purity ring, this type of promise ring is worn as a reminder to be chaste. This can be given by a boyfriend or a girlfriend but is also frequently given by parents to a child. It is meant to keep one sexually pure until true love and marriage is found. This type of promise ring is a constant reminder to the wearer to remain abstinent until marriage.

A Promise of Substance Abstinence

A promise ring can also be used by those who are looking to stay free from alcohol or other harmful substances. This ring can be given to oneself or by someone else as a constant reminder to stay free from drugs and other substances that are harmful to the body.

A Promise to Remain Free of an Addiction

While a promise ring can be a promise to remain free from a drug addiction, it can also be a promise to remain free from other additions as well. This would include addictions such as gambling or pornography. It can also be a promise not to take an activity into access such as eating or even video games.

A Promise of Monogamy

When a couple does not to get civilly married they often wear promise rings as a symbol of their commitment to each other. These promise rings have a very strong meaning to the couple and is a way of them expressing their desire to be joined with that person forever.

A Promise of Silence

In ancient times, a ring would be given as a symbol of silence. It was used as a remembrance of the importance of keeping a particular secret. On occasion, a curse was engraved on the inside of what would occur if the secret was revealed.

A Promise of Spiritual Commitment

In the days of old it was common for prominent church leaders to wear a ring as a symbol of their commitment to the church. Even today many faiths wear rings as a reminder of their spiritual commitment.

A promise ring is not limited for the use of a pre-engagement ring, but can represent a promise between non-romantic friends, a promise to be chaste, a promise of substance abstinence, a promise to remain free from an addiction, a promise of monogamy, silence, spiritual commitment, and much more. One should not keep such a limited view of the promise ring as just being a pre-engagement ring, but see the potential of its other purposes as well. As seen, a promise can symbolize any promise that is made between to individuals or even a promise made to oneself. A promise ring is simply a physical sign of a commitment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.164.30 (talk) 13:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Chicago Tribune

 * According to the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States, the federal budget in 2005 allocates $168 million to abstinence-only education. President Bush is seeking $206 million for 2006.

 * "While proponents of abstinence-only education claim that virginity pledges help to fight teen pregnancy, many researchers are skeptical. Cynthia Dailard, a senior public policy associate at the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a nonprofit organization focused on reproductive health, says that there is no reliable evidence that abstinence-only programs reduce teen pregnancy or the spread of sexually transmitted diseases.

 * In a 2001 study published in the American Journal of Sociology, Peter Bearman, a professor of sociology at Columbia University, found that only 12 percent of the more than 2.5 million adolescents who had made a virginity pledge by 1995 remained abstinent until marriage. Abstinence pledges do delay sex for an average of 18 months, Bearman found, but those who break their pledges are a third less likely to use protection.

 * Pledgers are less likely to be prepared for an experience that they have promised to forgo, the study found."

 * I don't know who posted that, but I'd say the above would be more appropriate for the Abstinence-only sex education article.

Steve Lowther 06:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Bush administration
The comment about the Bush administration seems either irrelevant or very partisan. JEmfinger 22:02, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Some one must have removed it a while ago. I never saw it.

Steve Lowther 06:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced quote
From the article:

The Chicago Tribune wrote:
 * "Under the Bush administration, organizations that promote abstinence and encourage teens to sign virginity pledges or wear purity rings have received federal grants. The Silver Ring Thing, a subsidiary of a Pennsylvania Evangelical Church, has received more than $1 million from the government to promote abstinence and to sell its rings in the United States and abroad."

When? Cite, please. -- The Anome 02:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Deletion restored. In such cases, pieces are not deleted, but marked with .  It was an article by David Bario posted at several websites. It is still hanging around in several places, like here or here.  I copied the quotation from "Chicago Tribune" site. Sorry I didn't think to copy the date. You may ask him yourself.  dab2107@columbia.edu mikka (t) 17:45, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I'd say that would be more appropriate for the Silver Ring Thing article.

Steve Lowther 06:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I propose merging Promise ring into this article; it is a very short, minor article which is closely related (almost identical) to this one. Simply adding the information from Promise ring as a section in this article would be more appropriate. Cheers! =David ( talk )( contribs ) 07:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

 * TTotally different concepts. There may be much more written about promise rings, somply no one cares. `'Míkka 03:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Entirely disagree, David. Purity rings are a subset of promise rings, not the other way around; if you must merge the articles, please do it in the other direction. - Etherjammer 12:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I changed the merge tags, as I don't want that to hold up consensus on this. How's that?  Thanks for your input, Etherjammer.  =David ( talk )( contribs ) 15:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

 * In the present state or article, the merge in this direction is out of question. Purity ring is a well-referenced article, about very specific topic. "Promise ring" is a vague unreferenced speculation, most of each I deleted. `'Míkka 16:07, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

 * What about changing the lead sentence to read "Purity rings (also called chastity rings or promise rings..." and then prodding the other for deletion? Because you're right, and that's why I wanted to merge them.  =David ( talk )( contribs ) 16:24, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I am not a deletionist, despite the appearance, and IMO it is possible that the second article may survive, since there are a whooping 701,000 google hits. Of course, most of them are from websites peddling diamonds and stuff, so all their texts are most probably marketing bullshit. Therefore it will require quite some time to dig some reputable, independent references. `'Míkka 16:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

"Purity Rings" are religious in nature, while one can argue that a 'Promise Ring' is not. Please do not merge or delte. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.84.66.34 (talk) 18:13, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

I am not a religious person at all. I wear a promise ring, not a purity ring. These two topics should not be combined. A promise ring is a promise to stay with one person and to promise to marry in the future. A Purity ring is very different from that, at least I think so. Please don't combine or delete it. Lavender333 05:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Purity rings are NOT also called promise rings. Promise ring is a wide term referring to a ring given to somebody, representing a promise. Whether that promise be marriage, engagement, commitment, chastity or to wash the dog every Wednesday. Nobody is suggesting to merge engagement rings with purity rings, they are simply not the same. EsocksLAMB 01:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. The only similarity between promise rings and purity rings is that they're both rings. A promise ring represents a promise to another person... a purity ring represents a promise to one's self (usually on a religious basis). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.155.164.30 (talk) 12:58, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

New Proposal
All right, how about merging purity rings as a subsection of promise rings? Not the same thing (that is, promise rings are not all purity rings) but a subset (that is, all purity rings are promise rings)? =David ( talk )( contribs ) 18:17, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia works exactly in the oppisite way: each independent topic deserves its own article. `'Míkka 15:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * In my experience, it's not so much. Be that as it may, consensus was pretty overwhelming.  =David ( talk )( contribs ) 04:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Promise rings can also be given prior to engagement and have nothing to do with purity.. It makes sense if for example your girlfriend is in law school for 3 years and engagement is more appropriate when you can actually live together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.185.7 (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I've removed the tag. While I don't agree, that's some pretty overwhelming consensus.  But I would very much like to see some fleshing out so that they don't remain stubs for long.  I've added cleanup tags.  =David ( talk )( contribs ) 04:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Miss Manners?
Why is her opinion on the ring on this page? I've never even heard of her. Her criticism is rather weak anyway. It's impolite to wear one? Who is going to look this page up and care at all about whether the ring is polite or not (in her opinion)? 122.104.164.28 (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I've never even heard of her. Not to be too trite, but the number of things you (or anyone else) haven't heard of would probably fill a Wikipedia. Using I've never heard of... as the reasoning to include or exclude anything is quite specious. Safety Cap (talk) 16:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The reference to Miss Manners is utterly non-notable and should be removed. Alboran (talk) 22:32, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "Miss Manners'" comment has been removed, I'm sure thinking women of the world in control of their own bodies are ever grateful for removal of this disgustingly biased comment of no relevance to the subject. I could just as soon quote George Orwell's "Junior anti-sex league" from 1984 on this article and it would have been as relevant. Or maybe Faulkner? "It was men invented virginity." Regardless, if this "Miss Manners" person has a notable influence on the purity ring, then please include why and how.  Otherwise, it doesn't belong here.  The talk about abstinence only education barely applies as well.  Also, did Miss Manners seriously suggest we should start publicly checking women's hymens again? "Unless publicly proven otherwise" I think it said? There was only one thing in life I've ritually burned, and that was my abstinence pledge when I left the Evangelical church that raped a dozen boys. Bloomingdedalus (talk) 09:53, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It doesn't appear that you understand what she said. She said that in polite society, a girl is presumed chaste unless publicly proven otherwise. How on earth did you get checking hymens out of that? She means by the girl stating otherwise or, in this age, something like a video showing up. For example, Paris Hilton, as an unmarried woman, would be presumed chaste except that she has publicly proven she is not. Martin is warning that people might not recognize it as a chastity ring because they don't see a need to advertise their status. But I agiree, it is trivial to the the article and doesn't really belong. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The most common and socially acceptable way that a girl proves herself to be no longer chaste is for her to get married and get pregnant.Wufusk (talk) 00:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I am a feminist, and I have to say that the quote from Miss Manners was not biased and it was the exact opposite of disgusting. Bloomingdedalus doesn't seem to undertand what etiquette is all about - Miss Manners is saying that polite people do not discuss whether or not a girl is chaste, because that is her own business and should not be up for public discussion ... and to wear a chastidy ring is bringing up that subject for public discussion, so therefore it is not polite. Wufusk (talk) 00:41, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

 * I told you that at least one editor completely misdunderstood the quote and you told me that I was being insulting. Guess I wasn't, huh? Niteshift36 (talk) 00:56, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, mea culpa on that one, Niteshift36. Wufusk (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I do, however, fail to see the reasoning for removing the quotation because that one person misunderstood it. After all, you, yourself, agree that this one person jumped to a totally unreasonable conclusion, so if you are to remove everything on wikipedia that such a person would misunderstand, you might as well shut down the site. Or should we just dumb down every article to the lowest common denominator?  The other reasons people have suggested for removing the quote were that 1) they don't know who she is (and that was well responded to above), and 2) it was not notable and was trivial (to which I have responded below.) Wufusk (talk) 01:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It is a sad comment on today's society that people are not interested in proper etiquette, and that it is considered trivial. An article on Purity Rings should cover what they are and their history in society. Therefore a comment on the subject from a notable expert on social convention in today's society explaining what is considered to be etiquettely correct by societal norms is certainly a worthy addition to this page. If you do not know who Judith Martin (aka Miss Manners) is, the comment stated her title and linked to her Wikipedia page so that people could read about her qualifications. Wufusk (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Once again, you miss the point. I know who Martin is. Any who don't can read her bio. Her notability isn't in question. What IS in question is the relevance of her opinion to the article. As I mentioned before, just because a notable person says something, that doesn't mean it needs to be in the article. As I said before, just because someone like Michael Jordan says he likes chocolate cake doesn't mean we need to put that in the article about chocolate. Thus far, a number of editors (ones who have edited more than 2 articles), have agreed her opinion on the matter is trivial and not notable. On the other hand, you've engaged in an edit war, continually reinserting it and FINALLY, after all that warring, decide to discuss it. Please confine your "discussion" to the actual issue, not your commentary on how sad society has become. That is not the purpose of the talk pages. Niteshift36 (talk) 01:12, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Once again, YOU miss the point.
 * 1. When I said "if you do not know who (she) is", I was not talking to you. I was making my point to all who are reading this page ... don't take everything so personally.
 * 2. Michael Jordan is not an expert on chocolate cake. Judith Martin is an expert on social convention, and an article on something such as Purity Rings (the wearing of which is entirely socially driven) should contain information about whether or not said subject is socially acceptable.
 * 3. As I mentioned in my last comment to you (which I put on our pages, not this one, because it was in regard to our discussion and not to this subject, and therefore did not belong here), I did not know about this Discussion Page until you told me about it, but once I knew it existed, I came here and have updated it. A bit late for the party, I know, but as I said, this site is not only for wiki-geeks who spend mucho time reading/updating these pages, it is also for people such as me who have knowledge and information about the subjects being discussed, but who might just be learning to use the site.
 * 4. The issue being discussed is etiquette and people's opinions on whether or not it is trivial or relevant, and therefore my comment is perfectly valid.
 * Wufusk (talk) 01:30, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * She's an advice columnist, not an expert.—Kww(talk) 01:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Martin is an advice columnist on etiquette. That doesn't make her an expert on the rings or things related to them. Further, your comments like "It is a sad comment on today's society that people are not interested in proper etiquette" is NOT relevant. The topic here is NOT etiquette. The topic is NOT society's lack of interest in etiquette. The topic is purity rings. Period. BTW, some might find "wiki-geek", a term you've used more than once, to be insulting. Since you're so concerned about etiquette, you might want to stop using it. Niteshift36 (talk) 01:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 1. I apologize if I offended anyone with the term "wiki-geek" ... it was not meant as an insult, since the current social attitude toward the term "geek" is a positive one. I used that term once in our earlier discussion, and repeated it here only in repeating what I said to you in that earlier discussion, since it appears you deleted it without first reading it.
 * 2. According to Wikipedia, an expert "is a person with extensive knowledge or ability based on research, experience, or occupation and in a particular area of study." "Judith Martin (née Perlman, born September 13, 1938[1]), better known by the pen name Miss Manners, is an American journalist, author, and etiquette authority." She is not merely an up-and-coming advice columnist, she has been writing about the subject for years (books, as well as columns), and she is considered an authority on the subject and is often invited to speak on the subject. If you would read my earlier comments again, you will see that I did not say she was an expert on rings, but I have explained why an article on Purity Rings should contain information about their place in societal views.
 * 3. You did not chastise Bloomingdedalus on his/her mention of burning the abstinence pledge, but since you have a grudge against me you insist on criticising every tiny thing, which shows your lack of objectiveness. The topic of the Subject page is purity rings. The topic of this particular discussion, however, is whether or not a comment about the etiquette of wearing a purity ring is appropriate for the Subject page.

 * "since it appears you deleted it without first reading it" Why does it appear that way? Since I know you used it before, I clearly DID read it. AGAIN, her expertise isn't the issue here. whether or not her opinion is relevant is the issue. As for your crap (yes, crap) about my objectivity or some imagined grudge.....it's not worth the time to address properly. So far, consensus is very against you and consensus is what really runs Wikipedia. Niteshift36 (talk) 02:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, I guess you did read it since you said I used the word twice .. you got me there. The reason I thought it appeared that you had not read it was because you said that I used that word more than once, when in fact the second time was merely to say that "this is what I said earlier". Also because you did not seem to have read what I had told you earlier about not knowing this discussion page was here. Your use of YELLING and angry words is again, evidence of lack of objectivity. Wufusk (talk) 02:08, 27 September 2011
 * Obviously I was arguing her expertise in response to earlier comments by you and Kww saying that she was not an authority. And the reason her opinion is relevant is because an article on something such as Purity Rings (the wearing of which is entirely socially driven) should contain information about whether or not said subject is socially acceptable.(UTC) Wufusk (talk) 02:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Putting a single word into caps isn't really yelling, it's emphasis. However, even if it were yelling, that has exactly jack-shit to do with objectivity. And yes, I read that you claimed you couldn't find the talk page. Please don't bring that up because it really tempts me to say some unkind things. Bottom line: You hold the opinion that the quote is relevent. Numerous editors, most of them with a lot more policy experience, disagree. There is a consensus that the quote should not be included. That (I used bold so you won't confuse it with yelling) is what ultimately decides the issue. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * You are right that this site is ruled by consensus, and though history proves that consensus often does not make good decisions, it is the best we have, so we have to go with that. You have not, nor has anybody else here, bothered to actually argue against my contention of exactly why the quote it relevant. Everyone else's arguments have been effectively negated, and you seem to want to use childish language and argue that you are objective, when you don't even realize that an inability to speak calmly and without emotion during a debate is very much a sign that objectivity is lacking. The more you write, the more you prove my point. Feel free to say all the unkind things about me you want, because you know nothing about me. Being a new user and not knowing where all the pages are on wikipediea does not show a lack of intellegence about things that matter in life, whereas the lack of an ability to argue your point without getting irrationably angry at a total stranger certainly does. Wufusk (talk) 14:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * "You have not, nor has anybody else here, bothered to actually argue against my contention of exactly why the quote it relevant." I have explained why. I'm sorry that you missed it. I won't bother to repeat it because you clearly don't care.
 * "Everyone else's arguments have been effectively negated" No they haven't.
 * "and you seem to want to use childish language and argue that you are objective, when you don't even realize that an inability to speak calmly and without emotion during a debate is very much a sign that objectivity is lacking" First, you fail to grasp that we are here to discuss the article, not my alleged conduct. Discuss the article, not the editor. Second, your basic premise is wrong. This isn't an objectivity issue at all. It's frustration with repeating myself over and over to a person who is either unwilling to listen or simply incapable. For example, you claimed you didn't know where the talk page was (something I still find difficult to believe). A reasonable person would have asked where it was after being told that it needed discussed on the talk page multiple times. Instead, you ignored that invitation and forced that quote into the article over and over. But if one becomes frustrated with a person who has repeatedly ignored what they were told, edit warred with multiple editors and has an amazing case of WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT, then they must lack objectivity. Thanks for that does of hypocrisy. Your edit history is almost solely related to this quote in this article. That is a strong indicator of a lack of objectivity. You are looking like a WP:SPA. Lastly, you haven't managed to get me angry. I'd have to actually care enough about the issue or you and frankly, I don't care enough about either. You overestimate you abilities sunshine. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * 1. As I said earlier, I have accepted the fact that my opinion is against consensus on this page, I only continue to respond to address your direct allegations.
 * 2. Don't curse at people if you don't want to be called on it.
 * 3. No, you haven't. Your comments about Michael Jordan and chocolate cake was refuted with the explanation that the relevancy is in that her expertise is in the area of social convention and the wearing of a purity ring is entirely socially driven, so anyone wishing to research such a subject would surely be interested to know what societal views are on that subject. (How's that for a run-on sentence?) I am actually no longer interested in your opinion on that subject, I am merely restating it since you apparently missed it above.
 * 4. Yes, they have. First it was that the person had never heard of Miss Manners before, and Safety Cap responded to that. Then it was that the quote is not notable, that Martin is not an expert, and that she was suggesting that women's hymens be publicly checked. All of which have been answered.
 * 5. Frustration and lack of objectivity are two very different things. I simply call them as they present themselves.
 * 6. The first time I heard that a Talk Page existed, I searched for it and found it. (I thought we were supposed to be discussing only the subject at hand ... here again, you are discussing other things every bit as much as I have.)
 * 7. I have acknowledged everyone else's input here, and I have acknowledged that the consensus is against me. No one has actually proven that I am in error, it has simply been proven that more people who view this page disagree with me ... that does not prove that I am wrong, especially since no one has directly disputed my reasoning (see above). A sensible person knows when to agree to disagree, and that I have already done. I agree this discussion has gone on way past the point of interest, but I do have the right to answer when accused, so I will continue to do so.
 * 8. I am not a WP:SPA, I am simply a new user of wikipedia and I lack the time to spend hours upon hours a day on this site, so it will take awhile to hit other subjects. Wufusk (talk) 00:28, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Go ahead and "call me" on a word or two profanity. It doesn't really violate any rule. I also have no interest in your uninformed opinion. You really should stop the "I'm a new user" lie. You first put that passage in back in May. You repeatedly re-inserted it under this account and a couple of IP addresses......and added one item to one other article. Months of putting the same info into the same article.That, my friend, is a classic SPA. Niteshift36 (talk) 01:59, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Never said your language was against any rule, it's just rude, childish, and unprofessional. Researched chastidy rings after convo with friend way back when, googled it and found article, entered update. Never read another wikipedia article except that one for years(months? really don't know, it was awhile,though), but was curious as to why someone (I thought another user) kept removing it, but I wouldn't call that a user of the site because I never created account or realized what all was there until recently, so yes, I am a new user under the description of such as understood by s/w support. I do have two IP addresses - one at work and one at home. Nothing unusual there. I've explained the new login below. You know nothing about me, so you don't know how off-base your suggestion that my opinion is uninformed is, but who really cares. I'm at least informed enough to know how to actually answer all questions asked, or if not, to not say I did.Wufusk (talk) 03:15, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I frankly don't care if you think it's rude. You're calling it "childish" is insulting and ironic when coming from a person so concerned about etiquette. Unprofessional? When I start getting paid for this, I'll care about "professionalism". If you define your actions as "professional", then we clearly differ on the meaning of the word. You ARE "uninformed" in terms of Wikipedia, which is the context I used it in. Face it, anyone who couldn't even find the talk page (which I still don't believe) can't claim to be anything but uninformed. Lastly, no matter how much explaining and re-writing of history you do, you're still a SPA. BTW, the first time you put it in under this account was May 19, 2011. (You put it in using an IP even before that and it was removed). The edit from this account was removed the same day by an administrator and you began your long edit war. Now have the last word because you've bored me long enough.Niteshift36 (talk) 03:27, 29 September 2011
 * OK, I will give you that I was (and still am to a very large extent) uninformed about wikipedia ... definitely got me on that one. (I thought you were talking about uninformed on the subject of purity rings and etiquette, sorry.) I could have found the talk page had I known it existed. I have realized one thing - you believe that everyone should understand about talk pages, and maybe everyone who grew up with social media does.  But at the same time, I believed that everyone should understand readily that a pregnant woman is publicly known to no longer be a virgin. So I guess we both incorrectly assume others have the same mindframe as us. Wufusk (talk) 22:40, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Sourced to broken link, possibly original research (synthesis)
I removed the following paragraph: "Critics of purity rings argue that virginity pledges are an unrealistic approach to suppressing teenage sexuality and any consequential outcomes such as pregnancy, STDs, etc. A 2004 review of a number of independent American studies concluded that abstinence programs "show little evidence of sustained impact on attitudes and intentions", and furthermore "show some negative impacts on youth's willingness to use contraception, including condoms, to prevent negative sexual health outcomes related to sexual intercourse"." The source cited was broken at the time I tried to access it, but from the quotation provided, it seems that this paragraph might be a kind of synthesis-style original research, as the quotation mentions virginity pledges in general rather than purity rings in particular. Also, the use of "critics...argue" is weasel wording, as the critics should be identified. Ecto (talk) 07:46, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could have just littered it with cites needed, having it missing neuters the cultural backlash against the rings as though it never happened. While it might seem "orignial research" and your personal distates for "critics argue" (I am certain it is not weasel words when sources are established) I can't help but think your removal of the paragraph might just be your personal attempt at altering history. Right now, you don't seem to have enough reason for completely removing it.Sanitycult (talk) 17:04, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * This paragraph made it clear why we must follow No original research.
 * About my "personal distates for 'critics argue'" please see Avoid weasel words. Also, there were no "sources established" (unless you count one broken link to information that was not directly related to the article's subject anyway).
 * "I can't help but think your removal of the paragraph might just be your personal attempt at altering history." Actually, it's my personal attempt at improving Wikipedia by bringing its content into line with its policies. By the way, I'm assuming you assume good faith, but I can't help but think you should take a look at Assume good faith, just for your own curiosity's sake.
 * For an explanation why we are under no obligation to keep this unsourced and contentious material, please see Citing sources and Verifiability.Ecto (talk) 00:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

 * I second the opinion of Ecto (however I have to wave a finger: while the link is broken, the info in question is easily findable): the cited texts say nothing about specifically purity rings. If anywhere, they belong to sexual abstinence article. - Altenmann >t 17:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry
I have opened a case regarding the identical addition of the Miss Manners quote by multiple accounts. Anyone interested should comment there. Thanks. --Ebyabe (talk) 19:32, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Smelled like a sock to me too. I just requested page protection too Niteshift36 (talk) 19:35, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

You have suggested that I was guilty of sock puppetry, but I assure you that is not the case. I had previously been updating this site without logging in, but then decided it would be best to create an account, so I did that, and used the new account for my next update. It was an attempt to improve my communications, not to subvert the rules or confuse people. Wufusk (talk) 14:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Use
is it really only Christians who use such rings? It is in each declined the impression I get from the article.--80.161.143.239 (talk) 17:28, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

WP:LABEL violation
Altenmann, regarding this, the fact that the WP:Reliable source calls that matter controversial does not mean that the text should stay. It is still a WP:LABEL violation. WP:LABEL states that "contentious opinion[s] [...] are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject. In some cases, in-text attribution might be a better option." While abstinence-only sex education has been controversial, depending on the context, it is not usually described as controversial. By that, I mean that the term controversial is not usually used when describing that topic, which is also why we currently do not begin the lead of the Abstinence-only sex education article by calling that topic controversial. In the case you reverted me on, in-text attribution is best. Either that, or briefly explaining how the matter is controversial. WP:LABEL is clear that we typically shouldn't simply call a matter controversial; we should explain how it is controversial. Flyer22 (talk) 16:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Removing it was the right call. Just because a RS said it doesn't mean it's now exempt from our desire to be neutral. If I can show a RS that calls Obama a "socialist" or "Muslim", do you think that he should be labelled at such in his bio? Or if a RS calls a restaurant the "best in town", do we now call it the best in the article? In a case like this, where there is a significant split in opinions about the education, calling it controversial would pretty much over-ride the other half of people who think it isn't controversial. If people are interested in the subject, they can click the link and go read about the expanded view. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

 * I appreciate that you removed the term, and weighed in here about it. Flyer22 (talk) 20:31, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Purity ring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150402102855/http://lifestyle.msn.com/messageboards/thread.aspx?board=00000065-012b-0000-0000-000000000000&thread=00000065-0000-0000-0850-020000000000 to http://lifestyle.msn.com/messageboards/thread.aspx?board=00000065-012b-0000-0000-000000000000&thread=00000065-0000-0000-0850-020000000000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Purity ring. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150402102855/http://lifestyle.msn.com/messageboards/thread.aspx?board=00000065-012b-0000-0000-000000000000&thread=00000065-0000-0000-0850-020000000000 to http://lifestyle.msn.com/messageboards/thread.aspx?board=00000065-012b-0000-0000-000000000000&thread=00000065-0000-0000-0850-020000000000

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Trivia
Cerebral726, regarding this an and this, why you are restoring trivia? That content doesn't improve the article in any way. It's hardly any different than noting a variety of celebrities using some new condom brand. That is why I removed the material, which should have been obvious without an edit summary. I use an edit summary 99.9 percent of the time when not reverting problematic edits with WP:Huggle (as WP:Huggle handles the edit summaries for me). And the one time I don't, an editor restores obvious fluff? I also removed unnecessary headings and restored an important part of the initial introduction. And, really, with as small as this article is, it doesn't need even the one section heading I gave it.

I ask that you don't ping me to reply. Since you watch the article, you don't need pinging either. But I pinged you for good measure. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologize for overzealously reverting the changes you made and getting rid of fixes that unequivocally improved the article. However, in regard to the celebrities who wore the ring, to me, the phenomenon of several teen idols/Disney stars from the mid-2000's to the mid 2010's wearing and advocating for the ring was a significant part of how purity rings were known and portrayed during that time period, and while that connection may not have been drawn out in the original text, that was my interpretation as to why it was included in the first place. I believe that it would be better to try and find a source about the prevalence of purity rings in pop culture during that time period to expand on why that isn't just "trivia" but an integral part of understanding how purity rings have been perceived and represented, rather than removing that list altogether. I may do some digging and try and find a source. Cerebral726 (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I apologize for getting snippy with you above. I wouldn't strongly oppose a WP:In popular culture or "In the media" section that is presented better than the content I removed. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 21:58, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries. On the surface, my revert was a bit flippant, and I did over-revert! I'll look into finding good sources for that section, and I'm sure you'll see when I add it. Cerebral726 (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * In fact, I wouldn't oppose it at all. I wouldn't (and don't) prefer the inclusion in this case, but I'd be more so indifferent to it. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Anupam, regarding this, you have the WP:Consensus matter backwards. An editor was WP:Bold and I have validly challenged their bold addition. See WP:ONUS. Also see above. How do you justify retaining that material and reverting all of my changes? Exactly why are all those headings needed? See MOS:Paragraphs. Headings needed for that little bit of material? No. If you are going to argue to retain that celebrity material, I will start a WP:RfC on it, and it will very likely be removed per that RfC. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 23:13, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, the information has been in the article for a long time and it has been properly reverted per WP:BRD. Now, you will have to gain consensus for removing it as you have already been reverted twice. As User:Cerebral726 noted, the fact that many celebrities wore purity rings contributed to their popularity. That being said, as a WP:COMPROMISE, I would be willing to accept your suggestion of moving the statement to an "In popular culture" or "In the media" section? What are your thoughts? With regard to your remark about the headings, my apologies—feel free to remove them; my revert only concerned the removal of the sentence about celebrities who sported purity rings. I hope this helps and look forward to hearing from you. With regards, AnupamTalk 06:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the information was already in the article; I forgot about that. But unnecessary formatting changes that do not improve the article were still made. For example, "purity movement" was noted and bolded in the lead because it redirects here; that format was following MOS:BOLD. And the celebrity material does not improve the article. As it is now, the content is simply trivia. As for Cerebral726, Cerebral726 was clear that "it would be better to try and find a source about the prevalence of purity rings in pop culture during that time period to expand on why that isn't just 'trivia' but an integral part of understanding how purity rings have been perceived and represented, rather than removing that list altogether." In other words, the content does not speak on many celebrities having worn purity rings having contributed to the popularity of purity rings. And titling the section "In popular culture" or "In the media" will not fix the issue. See what WP:In popular culture states. WP:ONUS still stands, and it states, "While information must be verifiable to be included in an article, all verifiable information need not be included in an article. Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article, and that it should be omitted or presented instead in a different article. The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content."

 * Anyway, although this article has been on my watchlist for years, as is clear by the section above, I'm going ahead and removing it. I don't feel the need to invest in this article. I've been reducing my watchlist when I feel I can part from an article. So do with this article what you will. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 23:05, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I am suggesting that the True Love Waits and Silver Ring Thing articles be merged into this Purity ring article. The individual articles as they are are quite small, many of the points of SRT (how purity pledges work, the use of Contemporary Christian Music, etc.) also apply to TLW, many notable purity campaigns are omitted (Eu Escolhi Esperar with millions of social media followers, TrueGirl aka. Secret Keeper Girl, etc.), and critics of abstinence such as John Oliver target multiple purity ring groups. Given this, I believe that one main article is better, to help group everything together. If editors see fit, Eu Escolhi Esperar could receive its own article in Portuguese and English. --LABcrabs (talk) 00:15, 23 April 2020 (UTC) I created a draft for the Eu Escolhi Esperar article. --LABcrabs (talk) 22:43, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 13:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposal Regarding Symbol Denoting Former Supporters
The dagger symbol (†) is used in the "supporters" section to denote someone who no longer supports purity rings. Ordinarily, this symbol indicates that the preceding person is deceased. It might be wise to replace it with a more appropriate symbol. Snorri Asagrimm (talk) 16:11, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

 * This looks like it's been removed now. I'm not sure how useful the list is, as it seems pretty indiscriminate (but a lot more reduced than previous versions of this article). GnocchiFan (talk) 13:01, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Purity ring


text:
Boom Boom Boom

"Boom Boom Boom" is a song by American hip house duo the Outhere Brothers, released in June 1995 by label Aureus as the fourth single from their debut album, 1 Polish, 2 Biscuits & a Fish Sandwich (1994), and is also featured on their compilation albums The Fucking Hits (2002), and Dance History (2005). It peaked at numbers 54 and 65 on the US Cash Box Top 100 and Billboard Hot 100. Outside of the United States, "Boom Boom Boom" topped the charts in Germany, the Republic of Ireland, and the United Kingdom. In the latter two countries, the song became the duo's second chart-topper. The original version contained sexually explicit lyrics which were removed for the radio edit but were retained in remixes of the track on the single.

American entertainment company BuzzFeed ranked "Boom Boom Boom" number 71 in their list of "The 101 Greatest Dance Songs of the '90s" in 2017.

Chart performance
"Boom Boom Boom" was very successful on the chart on several continents, becoming the duo's biggest hit, along with "Don't Stop (Wiggle Wiggle)". In Europe, it topped the charts in Germany, the Republic of Ireland, and the United Kingdom. In the latter country, "Boom Boom Boom" peaked at the top of the UK Singles Chart on July 2, 1995 – for the week ending date July 8, 1995 – during its fourth week on the chart, becoming The Outhere Brothers' second chart-topping song in Britain following "Don't Stop (Wiggle Wiggle)" in March 1995. It spent a total of four weeks at the top of the UK Singles Chart.

Additionally, the single entered the top ten in Austria (7), Denmark (8), Finland (6), France (3), Iceland (3), Italy (7), Norway (6), Spain (5), Sweden (2), and Switzerland (4), as well as on the Eurochart Hot 100, where it peaked at number three. Outside of Europe, "Boom Boom Boom" went to number-one on the RPM Dance/Urban chart in Canada and in Zimbabwe, number two in Australia, number eight in New Zealand, number 54 on the Cash Box Top 100 and number 65 on the Billboard Hot 100 in the Outhere Brothers' native United States. The song was awarded with a gold record in France and New Zealand and a platinum record in Australia and the UK.

Critical reception
In his weekly UK chart commentary, James Masterton wrote that "now the lads return with their second hit, possessing none of the novelty or even slight charm of the first. Top 20 on the name alone, but no further on its merits." Mark Sutherland from NME named it "this year's 'No Limits', only good." James Hamilton from Music Week's RM Dance Update said the song is "neither as blatantly filthy nor as good" as "Don't Stop (Wiggle Wiggle)", describing it as a "similar catchy I say boom boom boom, now let me hear you say whey-yo chanter".

Music video
Two different music videos for the song were made. The original video was later made available on YouTube in 2010 and had accumulated over 23million views by September 2021. For the UK/Europe release, a second video was made with animated clips, among them the 1935 short Betty Boop and Grampy (similar to their previous UK release "Don't Stop (Wiggle Wiggle)") but this time, The Outhere Brothers themselves appeared in front of the footage.

Track listings

 * 12-inch maxi – U.S.
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (TFX remix) – 4:32
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (ohb underground mix (part 2)) – 5:26
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls mix) – 4:13
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix (part 4)) – 4:43
 * 5) "Boom Boom Boom" (TFX instrumental remix) – 4:32

 * 12-inch maxi – Italy
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break the balls mix) – 4:10
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB radio mix) – 3:34
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix) – 5:26
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB extended mix) – 4:55

 * 12-inch maxi – France
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls mix 2) – 4:13
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (extended mix 2) – 4:45
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (underground mix 4) – 4:43
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix 2) – 5:26

 * 12-inch maxi – UK
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls long mix) – 4:13
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (TFX long mix) – 4:31
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (itchy and scratchy dub) – 6:55

 * 12-inch maxi – Germany
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (extended mix)
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls mix 2)
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (underground mix 4)
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix 2)
 * 5) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls mix 1)
 * 6) "Boom Boom Boom" (TFX club remix)

 * CD single – France
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls radio mix) – 3:00
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB radio mix) – 3:34
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (UK radio edit) – 3:20

 * CD maxi – Australia
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (radio version)
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (TFX long mix)
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (itchy and scratchy dub)
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix part 2)
 * 5) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB extended mix part 4)
 * 6) "Boom Boom Boom" (OHB underground mix part 4)

 * CD maxi – Remixes
 * 1) "Boom Boom Boom" (lalala radio mix) – 3:59
 * 2) "Boom Boom Boom" (UK radio mix) – 3:34
 * 3) "Boom Boom Boom" (lalala remix) – 3:56
 * 4) "Boom Boom Boom" (extended mix 2) – 4:45
 * 5) "Boom Boom Boom" (don't break my balls mix 2) – 4:13

title: Boom Boom Boom


text:
Eurostile

Eurostile is a geometric sans-serif typeface designed by Aldo Novarese in 1962. Novarese created Eurostile for one of the best-known Italian foundries, Nebiolo, in Turin.

Novarese developed Eurostile to succeed the similar Microgramma, which he had helped design. Microgramma was a titling font with only uppercase letters, which came with a variety of weights. A decade after Microgramma, Novarese resolved this limitation with his design of Eurostile, which added lowercase letters, a bold condensed variant, and an ultra narrow design he called Eurostile Compact, for a total of seven fonts.

Eurostile is a popular font, particularly suitable for headings and signs. Its linear nature suggests modern architecture, with an appeal both technical and functional. The squarish shapes with their rounded corners evoke the appearance of television screens of the 1950s and 1960s. It is particularly popular in science fiction artwork and media set or produced in the 1960s and '70s, alongside other graphic design use. Eurostile and its antecedent Microgramma had a near-monopoly on science fiction typefaces through the end of the 20th century, before Ray Larabie, seeing an opening in the market, began designing more modern computer fonts for the genre and distributed them through freeware.

Foundry type
Introduced by Nebiolo in 1962.

Cold type copies
The popularity of Eurostile continued strong right into the cold type era, and it was offered by various manufacturers under the following names:

 * Aldostyle — Autologic
 * Eurogothic — Alphatype
 * Eurostyle — Compugraphic
 * Gamma — III
 * Waltham — Star/Photon

Europe
Europe is a variant of Eurostile designed at TypeMarket in 1992–1993 by Alexey Kustov. The family includes 16 fonts, adding Shadow Demi, Shadow Oblique, and the missing oblique counterparts to the original Linotype family. It supports Cyrillic characters.

Eurostile DisCaps
Eurostile DisCaps is a small caps version of the font. The family comes with one width in regular and bold weights, without obliques.

Eurostile LT
Eurostile LT is a variant of Eurostile by Linotype. It uses squarer designs for non-letter characters like integral, infinity, pilcrow; letterlike symbols like @, the copyright mark, the registration mark; and accents such as cedilla and the tilde. However, the circle in circled letters (@, Ω) remained circular, which was not fixed until Eurostile Next. The asterisk was redesigned to use six points instead of five. Some numerals, such as "1", were redesigned with a straight tail instead of an angled tail for use in Japan.

In all, the family includes 11 fonts, adding an Outline Bold font to the original Eurostile family by Linotype. It supports ISO Adobe 2, Adobe CE, and Latin extended character sets.

Eurostile Next (2008)
Eurostile Next is an optically rescaled and redesigned version of the original font family, designed by Linotype Type Director Akira Kobayashi. The redesign was based on the specimens of the original metal fonts.

Redesigned features include restoring the super curve lost in the previous film and digital versions, reduced stroke weight difference between the upper and lowercase letters, type-sensitive accents and letterlike symbols (ç, É, @, €). In addition, Kobayashi added new Light and Ultra Light weights to complement the Extended, Normal, and Condensed variations within the family, added small caps letters and figures.

The family consists of 15 fonts in 5 weights and 3 widths each. It supports ISO Adobe 2,Adobe CE, Latin extended character sets. OpenType features include small caps, tabular and proportional figures, superior and inferior numerals, diagonal fractions, and ordinals. Kobayashi decided not to provide italics.

Eurostile Candy (2008)
Eurostile Candy is a variant of Eurostile Next with rounded corners. Extra strokes in letters such as a, s, or t, are removed. Joints in letters such as n and r have been simplified to create even more square shapes.

The family consists of three weights (regular, semi bold, bold) in extended width, without oblique fonts. It supports ISO Adobe 2,Adobe CE, Latin extended character sets. Extra OpenType features found in Eurostile Next are not supported.

Eurostile Unicase (2008)
Eurostile Unicase is a variant of Eurostile Next with unicase letters. The family consists of one font (Regular) in extended width, without oblique fonts, but it has heavier weight than Eurostile Next Extended Bold. It supports ISO Adobe 2, Adobe CE, and Latin extended character sets. Extra OpenType features found in Eurostile Next are not supported.

Eurostile Relief
Eurostile Relief is a shadowed version of the font designed by URW Studio.

Eurostile Stencil
Eurostile Stencil is a stencil font based on URW's Eurostile black extended (D), designed by Achaz Reuss.

Square 721
The Square 721 font from Bitstream is very nearly identical to Eurostile albeit with slightly different proportions. Square 721 is available in 2 weights and 3 widths each.

URW version
In the URW version, there are also Greek, Cyrillic, subscript and superscript, box drawing characters. The family has 16 fonts in five weights and three widths, with condensed fonts on regular and heavy weights; extended fonts on regular and black weights; complementary oblique fonts on black, bold, heavy, heavy condensed, medium, regular, regular condensed.

Variants
Francker is a variant based on Eurostile.

Michroma is a free and open source digital adaptation created by Vernon Adams, based on the extended forms of Eurostile and its predecessor Microgramma. Only one weight was released before Adams suffered injuries in 2014 that were ultimately fatal.

Television
Eurostile is one of the most popular fonts in science-fiction television. Doctor Who used the font for the credits during the Second Doctor era (1966 to 1969, with Patrick Troughton in the lead role), and again in cast and crew titles from 1987 to 1989. Eurostile—and the Microgramma Extended Bold font on which it is based—was the primary font used in the science fiction series UFO, created by Gerry Anderson in 1969. All of the vehicles and clothing bearing the logo of the series' secret organisation SHADO used the font, in addition to the main titles.

Eurostile was also used in the title of television shows such as Star Trek (on several first-season episode title cards), Ironside, Adam-12, Star Trek: Enterprise, Deal or No Deal, The Amazing Race, and Judge Mathis. Eurostile Extended Bold was used in the logo and inter-title sequence of Nickelodeon's Drake & Josh (alongside the regular variant, specifically on the "DRAKE" and "JOSH" scrolling text in the background), and was used in titles and set backdrops for Channel 4's early 90s comedy series Vic Reeves Big Night Out. Eurostile Std Heavy Condensed was used for titles and credits for Emergency! and The Six Million Dollar Man. Type expert Dave Addey noted: "Indeed, Eurostile is such a quick way to establish a timeframe that whenever I see it in real life – which happens quite a lot in my adopted home of California – I assume I’ve been transported to some futuristic dystopia, where a local care center feels more like a sinister government facility for scientific experimentation." Eurostile is also featured in many games on The Price is Right, as well as the logo for the Sunday night newsmagazine 60 Minutes. The 2021 Netflix biography on the American fashion designer Halston uses Eurostile Extended for the main logo and interstitial placements. The NBC game show The Wall uses both the Bold and Condensed variantsof Eurostile during gameplay.

Video games
Eurostile can be found in several video games such as Homeworld, Ratchet and Clank, Ridge Racer, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon, Tekken, Splinter Cell, Driv3r, Elite Dangerous, and the StarCraft series.

Film
Eurostile, particularly Eurostile Bold Extended, is used extensively in science fiction movies, among them 2001: A Space Odyssey (especially for HAL 9000) Jetsons: The Movie, Moon, Back to the Future, Starship Troopers, The Andromeda Strain and ''Total Recall.

Logos
Eurostile is a corporate branding font for Toshiba, Dimension Films, and Diadora. The retail version was authorized by Toshiba Europe GmbH to URW, where Eurostile Black OT was sold. Eurostile Extended Bold is used in the Nokia, New Flyer, Casio and Roland Corporation JUNO logos. The Eurovision Song Contest also used the font from 2004 to 2014. Eurostile is also used for the logo of Rotarex, Colgan Air, Roadcycling.com, and Roadcycling.mobi. Halliburton uses Eurostyle Extended Two for its logo. The NBA's San Antonio Spurs use Eurostile in their logos. In the 1970s and 1980s, Eurostile was the font for the Tandy Corporation. The Daihatsu corporate logo also used the Eurostile font. Dekoron Wire & Cable, LLC uses Eurostile for their company logo.

Currency
Eurostile is used in Canadian Journey series of Canadian dollar bank notes.

Other
Eurostile is used in many PSA Peugeot Citroën vehicles such as Peugeots and most Citroëns.

Dell used Eurostile on its products, starting with the OptiPlex GX150 in December 2000, and was used all the way until its 2016 rebrand. Additionally, it was also used for its full-screen "Dell End User Software License Agreement" first-run, pre-startup program that was seen on its Inspiron laptops made between 2003 and 2007, as well as for a black-colored keyboard (for the Num Lock, Scroll Lock, and Caps Lock indicator labels) from the early 2000s.

Rooster Teeth's Let's Play Minecraft series used Eurostile for its thumbnails on YouTube from 2012 to 2014.

Chip Ganassi Racing uses Eurostile for its numbers in the IndyCar Series.

Eurostile Next

 * Eurostile Next Font Family — by Akira Kobayashi
 * Eurostile Candy Font Family — by Akira Kobayashi
 * Eurostile Unicase Font Family — by Akira Kobayashi
 * Eurostile Candy & Eurostile Unicase: Eurostile extras — Akira Kobayashi's Eurostile Candy & Eurostile Unicase

title: Eurostile


text:
Beaverbrook Art Gallery

The Beaverbrook Art Gallery (Musée des beaux-arts Beaverbrook) is a public art gallery in Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada. It is named after William Maxwell "Max" Aitken, Lord Beaverbrook, who funded the building of the gallery and assembled the original collection. It opened in 1959 with over 300 works, including paintings by J. M. W. Turner and Salvador Dalí. The Beaverbrook Art Gallery is New Brunswick's officially designated provincial art gallery.

The building has undergone several expansions, the latest of which opened in 2017 via a design by Halifax-based MacKay-Lyons Sweetapple Architects. Former director Terry Graff stated that this "expansion and revitalization" aimed to make the gallery "an important destination for national and international contemporary art".

Building
In 1954 Lord Beaverbrook made an offer to Hugh John Flemming, the Premier of New Brunswick, to build and stock an art gallery in Fredericton. The Province accepted the proposal, and provided him with a site directly across from the New Brunswick Legislative Building on the southern bank of the Saint John River. Neil Stewart, of the Fredericton architectural firm Howell & Stewart, designed the mid-century modern building as a flat-roofed single-storey structure, faced with pale semi-glazed brick. It has a granite base, with cornices and a frieze of white marble quarried at Philipsburg, Quebec. The original exhibition space consisted of a high-ceilinged central gallery with a square gallery on either side.

In 1983 the building was expanded with the addition of east and west wings. These additions, funded by Marguerite Vaughan and the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation respectively, housed the Hosmer Pillow Vaughan collection of china and other decorative arts, and the Sir Max Aitken Gallery. In 1995 another expansion, housing the Marion McCain Atlantic Gallery, was opened. Its name honours the late wife of New Brunswick businessman Harrison McCain, who contributed $1 million to the project. On 20 May 2015, the Beaverbrook Art Gallery unveiled plans for a large expansion project following a 6-year $25 million fundraising campaign. The expansion includes a substantial increase to gallery space, an artist-in-residence studio, a learning theatre, a café, and an outdoor sculpture courtyard. It also features new mobility access features, including an elevator and ramps. Construction of the new pavilion began in October 2015. On 20 July 2016, the Gallery announced that it was increasing its fundraising goal from $25 million to $28 million after an outpouring of generosity from private donors and government sources. The increased capital will allow for more amenities as well increased programming and more. Construction of the new pavilion was completed in October 2017, making the Beaverbrook Art Gallery the largest art gallery in the Atlantic region.

Surrounding grounds
In 2009 a sculpture garden was inaugurated adjacent to the Gallery. The first sculpture to be commissioned was The Birth of Venus by New Brunswick Acadian artist André Lapointe. In 2012 the Gallery received a $300,000 donation from TD Bank Group to support the initiative, which was named the TD Sculpture Garden.

A sculpture by Marie-Hélène Allain (Awakening/Éveil) has been on display on the lawns in front of the Gallery since 1985. In October 2015 the Gallery acquired the sculpture Arriving Home by American sculptor Dennis Oppenheim. The sculpture was installed permanently in the TD Sculpture Garden behind the Beaverbrook Art Gallery near the Saint John River. On September 16, 2016, the Gallery unveiled the installation of a newly acquired work by Sorel Etrog titled King and Queen.

Original collection
The gallery opened with a collection of more than 300 paintings, mostly British, and assembled by Lord Beaverbrook. Most of the works had been purchased by Beaverbrook himself, with the help of advisors, including Sir Alec Martin, managing director of Christie's, W.G. Constable, curator of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, and Lady Dunn, the widow of the industrialist and art collector Sir James Dunn. Lady Dunn became Lady Beaverbrook when she married Lord Beaverbrook in 1963, a year before his death.

In 1954, Lord Beaverbrook had set up the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation, a charitable foundation one of whose objects was "the purchasing for or providing funds for the purchase by libraries museums or art galleries in the Province [of New Brunswick] ... of books manuscripts papers letters periodicals maps paintings prints statuary and other documents or works of art..." Beaverbrook gave the paintings he had already acquired to the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation, and subsequent purchases of works for the Gallery were made by the Foundation.

According to news reports in 1959, the total value of the collection was $2,100,000. It included works by J.M.W. Turner, John Constable, Thomas Gainsborough, Joshua Reynolds, Edwin Henry Landseer and other 18th- and 19th-century British artists. Beaverbrook had also acquired works by contemporary artists with whom he was personally acquainted, including Augustus John, William Orpen, and Graham Sutherland. Acting on the advice of Le Roux Smith Le Roux, he bought several paintings from the 1955 Daily Express Young Artists Exhibition, which Le Roux had organized. These included Lucian Freud's Hotel Bedroom, which won second prize in the exhibition. In addition to Lord Beaverbrook's own acquisitions, the Gallery had received two major donations of artworks before its opening. Toronto businessman James Boylen donated 22 paintings by Cornelius Krieghoff. Lady Dunn donated three portraits by Walter Sickert and three works by Salvador Dalí. Two of the Dalí paintings were portraits of Lord and Lady Dunn, while the third was the very large painting Santiago El Grande, which was on display in the central gallery when the Beaverbrook Art Gallery opened and has become closely identified with the Gallery. This painting, which measures 13x10 ft, and represents Spain's patron saint James the Great on a white horse, had been created for the Spanish Pavilion at the 1958 Brussels World's Fair.

Current scope of collection
In the years since Lord Beaverbrook donated the original collection, the Beaverbrook Art Gallery has continued to grow its permanent collection. In 2012 there were 3600 items in the gallery's permanent collection, which is made up of four separate collection areas: the British Collection, The Canadian Collection, the International Collection, and the New Brunswick Collection. The core of the British Collection is the original Beaverbrook collection with which the gallery opened. In the Canadian Collection, the gallery hosts an extensive collection of 19th- and 20th-century Canadian artists, including many works by members of the Group of Seven, Emily Carr, David Milne and Jean-Paul Riopelle. Within the Canadian Collection there is an emphasis on work from the Atlantic region, and the Gallery has extensive holdings of work by Christopher Pratt, Bruno Bobak, and Jack Humphrey. among others. The International Collection contains representative works from the 14th to the 20th centuries. The Hosmer Pillow Vaughan Collection of Fine and Decorative Arts forms part of the International Collection. In 1994 The Beaverbrook Art Gallery was designated the provincial art gallery of New Brunswick. A separate New Brunswick Collection was established to ensure a comprehensive historical survey of New Brunswick art, including work by Acadian, Maliseet, and Mi'kmaq artists.

In recent years, the Gallery has been expanding its collection to include a wider selection of modern and contemporary Canadian and International art. The Gallery has acquired many works by well-known First Nations artists including work by Anong Beam, Carl Beam, and Rebecca Belmore. In 2015 and 2016 the Gallery acquired more than 2000 additional works of art for its permanent collection, representing an outpouring of generosity from donors nationwide. Notable Canadian artists that have been added to the collection include, Iain Baxter&, Oscar Cahén, Jacques Hurtubise, and Denis Juneau. Internationally, the Gallery has acquired works by many modern and contemporary artists including Barbara Astman, Hans Hofmann, Edward Kienholz, Dennis Oppenheim, Jean-Paul Riopelle.

Ownership disputes
A dispute arose in 2003 between the Gallery and the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation over custody of the paintings that Lord Beaverbrook had purchased for the collection. This was followed by a second dispute between the Gallery and the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation over paintings that had been donated to the Gallery by Lady Beaverbrook (formerly Lady Dunn). The foundations proposed to take back and sell some of the most valuable works in the collection to raise funds for their charitable activities. The Beaverbrook Art Gallery maintained that it had received permanent custody of the works, citing the wishes of Lord Beaverbrook himself at the time of the gallery's creation.

Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation
Since the Gallery's opening, the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation had paid the insurance premiums on 133 paintings that Lord Beaverbrook had donated through the Foundation. In 2002 the Foundation hired Sotheby's to obtain a current valuation of the insured works, which the Gallery's director had valued at $7.6 million in Canadian funds in 2000. Sotheby's valued the collection at £35 million, nearly $90 million in Canadian funds. Turner's 1834 painting The Fountain of Indolence alone was estimated to be worth between $16.7 million and $25 million, and Freud's Hotel Bedroom between $5.2 million and $8.4 million in Canadian funds.

This large increase in value would entail a corresponding rise in the cost to the Foundation of insuring the works, and would in turn reduce the amount the Foundation could devote to its charitable causes in England. In 2003 the Foundation, which was headed by Lord Beaverbrook's grandson Maxwell Aitken, proposed to take back and sell the two most valuable paintings, The Fountain of Indolence and Hotel Bedroom. It would use the proceeds to pay the considerably reduced insurance premiums on the remaining works and to fund its causes in England. The Foundation would give the Gallery $5 million for its endowment fund, and guarantee that the remaining works would stay in the Gallery for at least the following ten years. This would have required the Gallery's directors to acknowledge that the paintings belonged to the Foundation, which they refused to do. In July 2004 the Gallery and the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation submitted the case to arbitration under the New Brunswick Arbitration Act, agreeing that the case would be heard by retired Supreme Court of Canada justice Peter Cory.

The dispute proceeded to arbitration, and Cory issued his arbitral award on 26 March 2007. Of the 133 disputed paintings, 85 were ruled as being gifts from the original Lord Beaverbrook, while 48 paintings were to be returned to the custody of the Beaverbrook U.K. Foundation. Cory also ruled that the Foundation had to pay the Gallery $4.8 million in legal costs. The Foundation appealed the award pursuant to a process agreed on by the parties, in which a panel of three retired Canadian judges (Edward Bayda, Coulter Osborne and Thomas Braidwood) heard the appeal. On 9 September 2009 the panel confirmed the original award that divided the paintings between the two parties. The Fountain of Indolence and Hotel Bedroom were among the works that stayed in the Gallery's possession. The appeal panel made no order on the legal costs for the appeal, so this matter remained outstanding. Then, a month after the appeal ruling, the Foundation announced that it would seek to have New Brunswick's Court of Queen's Bench overturn the decision; this in turn got the attention of the Charity Commission for England and Wales, the regulator of philanthropic organizations, which began "pursuing inquiries with the foundation's trustees in connection with ... the foundation's governance and financial affairs, [including] the trustees' pursuit of the litigation against the gallery." On 15 September 2010, the parties announced that the matter was finally settled by private agreement. They maintained the original 85/48 split of the disputed art works and said that they had also agreed on the allocation of legal costs; in a 2013 Afterword to his book on the dispute, New Brunswick author Jacques Poitras reported on speculation that the agreement would see the Foundation avoid paying the Gallery's  costs, and that in exchange the Gallery would get a share of the proceeds when the Foundation sold the 48 works that were to be returned to it.

Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation
The second dispute involved the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation's claim to ownership of 78 works that had been donated by Lady Dunn (later Lady Beaverbrook) personally or by the Dunn Foundation. After Lord Beaverbrook's death in 1964, his widow denied that the paintings belonged to the Gallery and proposed to withdraw them from the collection. In 1970 the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation, then chaired by Sir Max Aitken, arranged to purchase the paintings from her for a total of $250,000. This was done at the request of Wallace Bird, the Chair of the Gallery's Board of Directors and Lieutenant-Governor of the province, in order to keep them in the custody of the Gallery. On 28 February 2014, the dispute between the Gallery and the Beaverbrook Canadian Foundation was settled out of court, with the Gallery keeping 35 of the works and the Canadian Foundation keeping 43—with the agreement stipulating that those works would be on long-term loan to the Gallery.

title: Beaverbrook Art Gallery


text:
Censorship in South Asia

Censorship in South Asia can apply to books, movies, the Internet and other media. Censorship occurs on religious, moral and political grounds, which is controversial in itself as the latter especially is seen as contrary to the tenets of democracy, in terms of freedom of speech and the right to freely criticise the government.

Bangladesh
In June 2006, the government of Bangladesh issued a restraining order preventing Sigma Huda, U.N. special rapporteur on trafficking in persons, from leaving the country to deliver a key report on trafficking before the Human Rights Council in Geneva on 11 June 2007. The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour, 2007, asked Bangladesh to clarify corruption charges against a U.N. human rights investigator, which will prevent her from addressing the main U.N. rights body.

Selective blocking of web sites for brief periods has been reported, including:
 * The Bangla blogging platform Sachalayatan during July 2008
 * YouTube during March 2009
 * Facebook in May 2010
 * YouTube again in September 2012 was blocked for refusing to remove the controversial Innocence of Muslims movie trailer

Later these blocks were removed.

Several books of the Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasrin have been banned in Bangladesh and West Bengal.

India
Several books critical of religion have been banned in India or in parts of India as a precautionary measure to prevent riots or other form of violence. India was the second country in the world to ban The Satanic Verses by Salman Rushdie. The book Understanding Islam through Hadis by Ram Swarup was also banned.

India is listed as engaged in selective Internet filtering in the conflict/security and Internet tools areas and no evidence of filtering was found in the political and social areas by the OpenNet Initiative (ONI) in May 2007. ONI states that: As a stable democracy with strong protections for press freedom, India’s experiments with Internet filtering have been brought into the fold of public discourse. The selective censorship of Web sites and blogs since 2003, made even more disjointed by the non-uniform responses of Internet service providers (ISPs), has inspired a clamor of opposition. Clearly government regulation and implementation of filtering are still evolving. … Amidst widespread speculation in the media and blogosphere about the state of filtering in India, the sites actually blocked indicate that while the filtering system in place yields inconsistent results, it nevertheless continues to be aligned with and driven by government efforts. Government attempts at filtering have not been entirely effective, as blocked content has quickly migrated to other Web sites and users have found ways to circumvent filtering. The government has also been criticized for a poor understanding of the technical feasibility of censorship and for haphazardly choosing which Web sites to block. The amended IT Act, absolving intermediaries from being responsible for third-party created content, could signal stronger government monitoring in the future.

Pakistan
The OpenNet Initiative listed Internet filtering in Pakistan as substantial in the social and conflict/security areas, as selective in the Internet tools area, and as suspected in the political area in December 2010.

In late 2010 Pakistanis enjoyed unimpeded access to most sexual, political, social, and religious content on the Internet. Although the Pakistani government does not employ a sophisticated blocking system, a limitation which has led to collateral blocks on entire domains such as Blogspot.com and YouTube.com, it continues to block Web sites containing content it considers to be blasphemous, anti-Islamic, or threatening to internal security. Pakistan has blocked access to websites critical of the government.

In early March 2006, the government temporarily had all websites hosted at the popular blogging service Blogger.com blocked. Millions of websites from all over the world are hosted at blogspot, along with thousands of Pakistani ones. This step by the government is possibly due to the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy, as some blogspot websites put up copies of the cartoons.

Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is listed as a country "under surveillance" by Reporters Without Borders in 2011.

Several political and news websites, including tamilnet.com and lankanewsweb.com, have been blocked within the country. Tamilnet has been producing news about the Sri Lankan civil war, focusing in the north and the east of the country, and is seen by the government as a Pro-LTTE news website. A government spokesman has said that he is looking to hire hackers to disable Tamilnet.

The Sri Lanka courts have ordered hundreds of adult sites blocked to "protect women and children". This is no longer true as of 2017.

In February 2018 Facebook was blocked as an effort to prevent hate speech.

In October and November 2011 the Sri Lankan Telecommunication Regulatory Commission blocked the five websites, www.lankaenews.com, srilankamirror.com, srilankaguardian.com, paparacigossip9.com, and www.lankawaynews.com, for what the government alleges as publishing reports that amount to "character assassination and violating individual privacy" and damaging the character of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, ministers and senior government officials. The five sites have published material critical of the government and alleged corruption and malfeasance by politicians.

title: Censorship in South Asia