` :::1. The section deals with accusations - not with any admission.  2. Hari has carefully never admitted ``plagiarism.``  3. WP:BLP states that we must reflect accurately what the reliable sources state - and the sources in that secton deal specifically with the accusations, not with any ``admission.``   4.  When using reliable sources, the content of the source (as opposed to headlines) govern what the claims can state.  5.  In his return of the Orwell Prize, Hari does not make any admissions of plagiarism.  Nor was the Orwell Prize controversy founded in that - but n the claim that he made up an ``atrocity`` which did not occur.  So since the section with the title ``accusations`` contains claims about ``accusations`` then the section title should reflect what the section contains,  since the Orwell Prize article was not accused of containing ``plagiarism`` then that sectin can not be called ``plagiarism`` and since his actual apology does not contain ``plagiarism`` at all, we can not state on our own that he ``admtted plagiarism`` - there is no reason for us to make the charge on our own.  The principle on Wikipedia is that we do not make conslusions at all, but can only recite what is in the body of reliable sources, especially and specificaly when a ``living person`` is involved.  Cheers.   `