![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Image:JLENN01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 18:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Lennon was known to have, later in life, some association with the radical left (his lines "imagine no possessions... imagine all the people, sharing all the world" clearly show idealistic communist sympathies, as well). The Socialist Workers Party in England courted him, though he never actually joined. I wish I knew it well enough to add a section. But if anyone else does, I encourage you to add it. -- MQDuck 03:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I've again re-archived the tendentious discussion. It started out being about the provenance of a citation since replaced in the article, and evolved (or rather devolved) somewhat after that. As well, the quote from Ono released to the public has some sources as being through Geffen and others non-attributed. In order to avoid ruffling any firther feathers, the attribution to Geffen was removed. I think that fairly sums up the discussion was archived (those parts that actually dealt with the article, that is). Let's move on. I offer my apologies to the others outside the discussion for allowing the argument to escalate. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a big article that needs quite a few references. How long has this article been B-class? It's a scandal. Look at the big picture and think about elevating John to GA. The Beatles, McCartney, Epstein, Martin, The Beatles' assistants and family members are already there ( two more are up for a GA right now) - so why not him? -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned up this section a little bit. Got thoroughly disgusted doing so, I might add. Hotcop2 ( talk) 00:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I even changed the ending for a bit. Hotcop2 ( talk) 11:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
A minor detail: The article says six shots were fired. The Charter Arms revolver used (the Undercover model) holds five rounds. Percy Smogg ( talk) 04:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Perdomo and Pedermo are both given as the door-man's name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.0 ( talk) 12:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Perdomo seems to be the commonest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.4.21 ( talk) 10:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Surely his receipt of a MBE membership to the Order merits some coverage? 121.210.212.4 Rotovia ( talk)
Should MBE be takin off of his name because he returned it to the queen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.73.201 ( talk) 16:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
These years should be drastically cut back, as lots of the information is now in the Mimi Smith and Julia Lennon articles. I will now cut a little, and wait for the avalanche... :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 19:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I have done some work on the early years. -- andreasegde ( talk) 20:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
No Dick Lester and the film in Spain? ¿Qué está sucediendo? -- andreasegde ( talk) 21:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
The introduction doesn't read well. I suggest a rewrite, especially for:
"Lennon revealed his rebellious nature and irreverent wit on television, in films such as A Hard Day's Night (1964), in books such as In His Own Write, and in press conferences and interviews. He channelled his fame and penchant for controversy into his work as a peace activist, artist, and author."
I will attempt one later and I encourage others to do the same.
The freddinator ( talk) 16:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Take a look [ at this]. John should be next, but it will take a team effort. McCartney got a GA by the same method. Is anybody willing to come on board for references and copy-editing? -- andreasegde ( talk) 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I know Paul has a GA. I think you didn't understand my wording. That's what I get for growing up in Brooklyn, NY. Mister ricochet ( talk) 14:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
LOL. The land where men are men, and so are the women. Must be great to be a homosexual there! Mister ricochet ( talk) 18:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I do not know how to do citations, but I can certainly find sources for the info in question. Hotcop2 ( talk) 17:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
From 1970-1975: Solo career until Recreational drug use sections need work, and Yoko Ono (but she could always do with a bit of work on her). If references are put in, or stuff chopped out, this will be close to a GA. Then it's just a bit of elbow grease, and Bob's your Uncle, as they say. -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
All of a sudden, Wikicommons is questioning the Gruen NYC photo which I obtained persmission for and submitted the permission to Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 23:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about Fconaway. He's not an administrator. He's frustrated because they delete all of his pictures. Mister ricochet ( talk) 02:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Arcayne, That picture is a Wikicommons picture. It's also from your buddy Shankbone. So who are you threatening to have blocked? me or Shankbone? Mister ricochet ( talk) 06:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Listen, Kepp in mind that I didn't upload my dick to Commons nor did I post the picture file in it's open form here. You would have to click on the link to see it. Unfortunately, The very guy you are defending is to blame for the removal of the J.L. picture. You should be on his case. Not mine. Now all that we have is a Commons picture of his dick instead of a picture of John Lennon. Think about it.
Mister ricochet (
talk)
07:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, let's cool down. I see you have zero self control. I don't want you to say something to get you blocked or banned. I'm not into that scene. I would much rather you add to the article than harp on cocks. I see you haven't added anything to Lennon for lord knows how long. So maybe you should go back to the fantasy articles that you frequent. And as for the questions you ask, I'll answer them (since you jumped the gun and said I couldn't)
So there you go. Now behave yourself and make constructive edits to Batman and the 300 movie. Mister ricochet ( talk) 17:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Mister ricochet, you are now in block-able territory and I suggest you stop stamping your feet and acting like a child. By file size I am one of the top 50 loaders of images to Commons and out of 2,500 articles my photos illustrate, there are perhaps 20 articles that a model friend (not me) posed for because I tired of seeing every dude and bro take a camera phone picture of his cock and slap it up there. So yes, my photos of a model's body illustrate many of the body articles, from teeth to armpit to glans penis to chest - get over it. Aside from the fact you are making personal attacks against respected contributors, such as myself and Arcayne, you are doing so on a Talk page that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. The main issue with it is that the Lennon photo needs an OTRS ticket saying that it has been released GFDL. HotCop2 said it was released for Wikipedia to use, but because of our licensing structure with Wikipedia's copyright, they don't allow for non-GFDL images unless it strictly falls within the boundaries of that license. There are very few exceptions made. However, I was not the one who removed it, and I don't have a problem with it being used "Fair use" but the copyright that was listed by HotCop2 said it was released GFDL and the copyright of Bob Gruen was released to the general public. Basically, the way HotCop put that license on perhaps one of the most famous photos of Lennon, he said that Bob Gruen has released his copyright to the entire public to use the photo for commercial and non-commercial use. I question if that is really what Gruen intended. Copyrighting it that way--unless it is true--opens up the site to legal problems. However, I simply raised the question. Other user spotted it immediately. If it had not been me, it would have been someone else. Now, something I *disagree* with to a degree is that they do not allow fair use images of a person on BLP articles. This is one of the reasons why I spend so much time taking original photos of people myself. I initially fought against the no-fair use images of people argument, but I lost that battle. So, I have spent an inordinate amount of time hunting down and contacting people to take original photos for the site, releasing my own copyright on those photos. Over 500 people. It sucks - but I fought against the policy and lost. The bright side? We have a lot of original content on our site that we, the community, own. Regardless, stop acting like a teenager, stamping your feet because you didn't get your way over a Lennon photo. It's not my doing, it's Wikipedia's. I simply raised the question about the problematic licensing and I was 100% correct to do so. Now continue on in this vein, and you will be blocked. --David Shankbone 17:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
And did you issue that same warning to Arcayne? I don't accept the tone he has taken with me. And couldn't you find a friend with a straight cock? Thanks.
Mister ricochet (
talk)
18:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
R. , I respect everything you do. But dammit, I thought you were an admin all the while! You have a way with words. Mister ricochet ( talk) 23:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need a citation that "Whatever Gets You Thru The Night" hit #1, or that John re-recorded Lucy In The Sky with Elton John? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 23:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Removed rec. drug use, was horribly worded, had to go. If anyone is losing sleep over the removal, write a new section, we'll discuss if it has any value. I suggest a quick mention in one of the other sections. That's it. I added citations, removed some, it appeared to be citation bombed which is a no-no (but we love Andreasegde so we'll let that pass) there's a few more cites to go. Let's get him where he should be. Mister ricochet ( talk) 21:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Although we had full permission to use it, someone decided to hassle me once again over the permission. I tried for a few hours to reason with the Wiki powers, but it ain't worth it. I have removed it. So this mediocre page can find a suitably mediocre photo to go with it. Hotcop2 ( talk) 00:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
What's "bubelah"? Tvoz says she is occasionally confused by Brit expressions, but I'm non-plussed by this one. Please do tell... :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 09:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
BTW, another disputed photo is in (as if you hadn't noticed :) Why don't we put a new one in every single day? That would confuse the heck out of 'em... (Sound of manic laughing) I'm almost (almost I said) tempted to write, "The removal of this photo is disputed because my mother has it as a magnet photo on her fridge. She likes it, so why don't you?" (I'm being silly, and I profusely apologise.)
Another point: Why is the photo in the infobox always disputed, but other fair use photos in articles are not? Oh-oh; have I just shot myself in the foot? -- andreasegde ( talk) 11:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's go back to the free image of him from the cropped image of him, Yoko and Trudeau. It's noted as "Image:Lennon69.jpg", It can serve until we have an image that is done jumping through all the hoops of Common-ism. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 11:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the "Rehearsing Give Peace A Chance" photo to the infobox. It's from Commons, it's in colour, it shows Lennon playing guitar, and there is another photo of Lennon and the recording of the song further down. All we have to do is wait for Hotcop to cut through the red tape with a machete, Katana or a pair of sturdy Loppers, and we'll all be as happy as Larry. -- andreasegde ( talk) 12:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Getting rid of the "citation needed" is going well, but the "Political activism and the deportation battle" section is full of them. Time to insert refs, or get the scissors out... -- andreasegde ( talk) 00:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I have put Lennon's drug use back in (with a copy-edit) as it is well-referenced by Barry Miles' book, and web pages. if anyone has a problem with that, I suggest they find book references stating that Lennon did not take drugs. McCartney's article has the same section - it went for an FA and none of the editors mentioned the drug section as being a problem.-- andreasegde ( talk) 02:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It is now referenced, but I think it's in the wrong place. Shouldn't there be a section for Lennon and Ono's art stuff? (Bagism, Fly film etc.) -- andreasegde ( talk) 09:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
No, I think it's fine where it is. This article needs time continuity for his story to make sense; there are too many "sections" that pull critical things out of context. It wasn't "art" it was Lennon's ploy to receive amnesty as an ambassador to a (conceptual) country (and a great April Fool's prank). Hotcop2 ( talk) 20:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
There are two paragraphs that are not showing up in the article, but are there in the edit. I don't know how to fix this... anyone? Hotcop2 ( talk) 20:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Andreas, Can you move the "Househusband" section up to the end of the 1975 section, so it flows chronologically? Hotcop2 ( talk) 21:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I think there should be a May Pang section after Yoko and before house-husband. She ws there during an important part of his recording career, as well as being his lover, so I think she deserves more than one or two sentences here and there. -- andreasegde ( talk) 23:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to eliminate this three sentence summary of all the subtexts in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 01:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
You have to sign your comments with four tildes. Mister ricochet ( talk) 01:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The order now (albeit moving toward chronological as Hotcop would like) leaves it confused, as Househusband is way above Yoko Ono. I think I shall step back from this article until a concensus has been reached. Have fun :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 01:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
When we have so many sub-sections, we have decide on a flow. House-husband is in the "career" section because that was his career in the late 70s; we have to fill in the gap from 75-80 (I also changed the years of his solo career from 1970-1975 to 1970-1980 because that's what it was.
There is no way that this article can be completely chronological with all these subdivides. But, as an end section "personal life" it works. Cynthia should technically be in the Beatle section if we're going to be literal.
We have subsections. We have to make each individual subsection work. Hotcop2 ( talk) 01:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. His short forty-year life was very complex. Why should his article be any different?
Mister ricochet (
talk)
02:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
LET"S DECIDE ON THE ORDER OF THE SUBSECTIONS Hotcop2 ( talk) 02:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The only thing you might wanna do is move the family up. Mister ricochet ( talk) 02:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've rearranged the major sections to what I think makes the most sense flow-wise and topic-wise. Opinions? We can still decide on the order of the less important sections, like Primal Therapy and Pseudonyms. Obviously, memorial would go last, I think Hotcop2 ( talk) 03:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we're on our way to a somewhat coherant Wiki entry here. if anything it suffers from a little too much micro info; sometimes less is more. After we decide the order, we can suggest deletions or catch duplication, which Andreas has been doing quite nicely. Hotcop2 ( talk) 03:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC) I agree with that. Andreasegde got this thing going. It's finally looking good. Mister ricochet ( talk) 03:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I had to revert part of the archive
prematurely performed by Mister Ricochet, as we don't archive recent conversations. As some of those conversations noted Mister ricochet's suspiciously familiar mistakes, I think it needs to still remain in the discussion page for now.
I've also noted that in Mister ricochet's discussion page, he seems to note how he had obtained David Spindel's permission for a John Lennon image, and provided Spindel's email address. Guess who also made such a claim? The
SSP report has been filed, and I will appraise this discussion of the results.-
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
08:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, this is Rumor Control: here are the facts: The user identifying themselves as Mister ricochet has been found by SSP, RFCU and AN/I to be one of a great many sock-puppets for none other than that permanently banned puppetmaster, SixString1965. Hopefully, he will realize that he is always going to be caught, and stops wasting our time. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
if we really want this article to make sense, we should eliminate the "personal life," put Cynthia and Julian before 1960-1970, put Yoko ono before 1970-1980, and the mention of the "Lost Weekend" as it stands now becomes sufficient. Andrea, you can do the cut/paste and see if it works. Hotcop2 ( talk) 15:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's leave the 'give peace a chance' image in place for a while, until we have something good, free and not subject to any more nonsense. I think Hotcop is going to have his image source submit the old image again, and maybe when it clear WikiCommons anf GDFL, we can use that. Until then, let's hold off on images for a while. Call it a case of once bitten, twice shy, and thrice riding around in a covered PopeMobile. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I learned this from Kingboyk, whilst working on the Paul McCartney Page, and although I disagreed with him at the time, I later understood what he was talking about; he was right.
It deals with Lennon alone, and then what happened around him. It’s hard to do, but one can not make pages chronological, as it makes it too confusing. - [User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] (
talk)
02:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S., From
past experience, I know what I'm on about. :) -[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] (
talk)
02:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've moved stuff about again, as I think it's more readable. The marriages and relationships section is great now, (whoever did it) because My Pang is now in there with the Lost Weekend. The Comeback section is strange, because the stuff in it really belongs elsewhere. -- andreasegde ( talk) 14:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I have moved some of it. -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
After this order thing has been sorted out, it is paramount that we look for citations for everything that needs it, and then some... If something needs a citation, but is not needed, it should be deleted. -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The Annie Leibovitz quote should go in her own article. Will do it later, but I have to go to the Pain-maker's first (dentist.) :( -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Sentences containing things like, "rekindled his creativity", "had come to a bitter end", "Lennon delighted at having a ringside seat", "with Lennon at the helm", and "they got together many times", are too flowery and not encyclopedic enough (GA reviewers hate them :)) They would be alright for a biography I suppose, but not for a Pedia. Apologies if that sounds a bit harsh. -- andreasegde ( talk) 14:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
there, nothing else to say ;-) Hotcop2 ( talk) 18:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The "Views on Christianity" section, IMHO, is too long, as it's as long as The Beatles section. -- andreasegde ( talk) 20:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I have cut it back. -- andreasegde ( talk) 21:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
It is now 7,786 bytes, which could be made into a new article (it's too long as it is). Any ideas about a title for a new article?... -- andreasegde ( talk) 22:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Photos of Lennon and Cynthia are now in, as well as May Pang (thank you for uploading that one Hotcop). -- andreasegde ( talk) 22:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
These need work, but especially the first two. -- andreasegde ( talk) 17:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
This the John Lennon talk page. It used to be a hive of activity and opinions - where did everybody go? (Sound of deafening silence...) -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
yeah the page was changed to "I am a kook"-john lennon and as the page is protected I can't edit it--
12.72.53.178 (
talk)
00:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Andreas, You know me better then that. I wouldn't vandalize ANY pages. The problem here is with the editors pissing people off. I was a damn good editor in my time, Then you got jealous people who come in to just stir the pot. I still want to know why nobody especially Arcayne, didn't email Spindel about the picture. Ahh... Good to be back for a minute. And Arc, watch your language. Whatever happened to the holiday spirit? Tvoz, keep cool.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
02:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Of course I'm not going anywhere. But just remember... I would never vandalize any pages. Especially calling JL a kook. Really uncool whoever that was. Anyway, I'll catch you in cyberspace.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's true. Between you and Hotcop2, the article has some substance and not a jumble of run on sentences. So, keep the excellent work going and for the new year you can give John that GA that everyone is looking for.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's get JL that GA, Whaddyasay Arcayne?
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
If you like John Lennon (as I'm sure you do, Sixstring/ Innocentvictim) then you have to think about PEACE. That's what he talked/sang about, didn't he? He had a really difficult life when he was young, but he had a vision, and he believed it. What he really said was this: Be honest, but be nice. This thing we are all writing about is not about you and Arcayne, it's about JOHN LENNON, and the Wikipedia article concerning him, and only him. That is what we should be concentrating on. We should co-operate and fight against vandals (who say things like "Lennon and McCartney were homos, dude) and not not fight against each other. I'm very passionate about this, because I really don't like it (and it makes me feel ill). -- andreasegde ( talk) 03:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah! Hotcop2 has just put in much-needed references, which is absolutely wonderful. I may give Hotcop2 a Barnstar. Which one, I ask? -- andreasegde ( talk) 03:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Image:JLENN01.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 18:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Lennon was known to have, later in life, some association with the radical left (his lines "imagine no possessions... imagine all the people, sharing all the world" clearly show idealistic communist sympathies, as well). The Socialist Workers Party in England courted him, though he never actually joined. I wish I knew it well enough to add a section. But if anyone else does, I encourage you to add it. -- MQDuck 03:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
I've again re-archived the tendentious discussion. It started out being about the provenance of a citation since replaced in the article, and evolved (or rather devolved) somewhat after that. As well, the quote from Ono released to the public has some sources as being through Geffen and others non-attributed. In order to avoid ruffling any firther feathers, the attribution to Geffen was removed. I think that fairly sums up the discussion was archived (those parts that actually dealt with the article, that is). Let's move on. I offer my apologies to the others outside the discussion for allowing the argument to escalate. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:38, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
This is a big article that needs quite a few references. How long has this article been B-class? It's a scandal. Look at the big picture and think about elevating John to GA. The Beatles, McCartney, Epstein, Martin, The Beatles' assistants and family members are already there ( two more are up for a GA right now) - so why not him? -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Cleaned up this section a little bit. Got thoroughly disgusted doing so, I might add. Hotcop2 ( talk) 00:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
I even changed the ending for a bit. Hotcop2 ( talk) 11:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
A minor detail: The article says six shots were fired. The Charter Arms revolver used (the Undercover model) holds five rounds. Percy Smogg ( talk) 04:55, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Perdomo and Pedermo are both given as the door-man's name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.0 ( talk) 12:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC) Perdomo seems to be the commonest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.4.21 ( talk) 10:07, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Surely his receipt of a MBE membership to the Order merits some coverage? 121.210.212.4 Rotovia ( talk)
Should MBE be takin off of his name because he returned it to the queen? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.179.73.201 ( talk) 16:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
These years should be drastically cut back, as lots of the information is now in the Mimi Smith and Julia Lennon articles. I will now cut a little, and wait for the avalanche... :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 19:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
I have done some work on the early years. -- andreasegde ( talk) 20:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
No Dick Lester and the film in Spain? ¿Qué está sucediendo? -- andreasegde ( talk) 21:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
The introduction doesn't read well. I suggest a rewrite, especially for:
"Lennon revealed his rebellious nature and irreverent wit on television, in films such as A Hard Day's Night (1964), in books such as In His Own Write, and in press conferences and interviews. He channelled his fame and penchant for controversy into his work as a peace activist, artist, and author."
I will attempt one later and I encourage others to do the same.
The freddinator ( talk) 16:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Take a look [ at this]. John should be next, but it will take a team effort. McCartney got a GA by the same method. Is anybody willing to come on board for references and copy-editing? -- andreasegde ( talk) 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I know Paul has a GA. I think you didn't understand my wording. That's what I get for growing up in Brooklyn, NY. Mister ricochet ( talk) 14:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
LOL. The land where men are men, and so are the women. Must be great to be a homosexual there! Mister ricochet ( talk) 18:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I do not know how to do citations, but I can certainly find sources for the info in question. Hotcop2 ( talk) 17:19, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
From 1970-1975: Solo career until Recreational drug use sections need work, and Yoko Ono (but she could always do with a bit of work on her). If references are put in, or stuff chopped out, this will be close to a GA. Then it's just a bit of elbow grease, and Bob's your Uncle, as they say. -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
All of a sudden, Wikicommons is questioning the Gruen NYC photo which I obtained persmission for and submitted the permission to Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 23:47, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry about Fconaway. He's not an administrator. He's frustrated because they delete all of his pictures. Mister ricochet ( talk) 02:57, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Arcayne, That picture is a Wikicommons picture. It's also from your buddy Shankbone. So who are you threatening to have blocked? me or Shankbone? Mister ricochet ( talk) 06:11, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Listen, Kepp in mind that I didn't upload my dick to Commons nor did I post the picture file in it's open form here. You would have to click on the link to see it. Unfortunately, The very guy you are defending is to blame for the removal of the J.L. picture. You should be on his case. Not mine. Now all that we have is a Commons picture of his dick instead of a picture of John Lennon. Think about it.
Mister ricochet (
talk)
07:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, let's cool down. I see you have zero self control. I don't want you to say something to get you blocked or banned. I'm not into that scene. I would much rather you add to the article than harp on cocks. I see you haven't added anything to Lennon for lord knows how long. So maybe you should go back to the fantasy articles that you frequent. And as for the questions you ask, I'll answer them (since you jumped the gun and said I couldn't)
So there you go. Now behave yourself and make constructive edits to Batman and the 300 movie. Mister ricochet ( talk) 17:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Mister ricochet, you are now in block-able territory and I suggest you stop stamping your feet and acting like a child. By file size I am one of the top 50 loaders of images to Commons and out of 2,500 articles my photos illustrate, there are perhaps 20 articles that a model friend (not me) posed for because I tired of seeing every dude and bro take a camera phone picture of his cock and slap it up there. So yes, my photos of a model's body illustrate many of the body articles, from teeth to armpit to glans penis to chest - get over it. Aside from the fact you are making personal attacks against respected contributors, such as myself and Arcayne, you are doing so on a Talk page that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. The main issue with it is that the Lennon photo needs an OTRS ticket saying that it has been released GFDL. HotCop2 said it was released for Wikipedia to use, but because of our licensing structure with Wikipedia's copyright, they don't allow for non-GFDL images unless it strictly falls within the boundaries of that license. There are very few exceptions made. However, I was not the one who removed it, and I don't have a problem with it being used "Fair use" but the copyright that was listed by HotCop2 said it was released GFDL and the copyright of Bob Gruen was released to the general public. Basically, the way HotCop put that license on perhaps one of the most famous photos of Lennon, he said that Bob Gruen has released his copyright to the entire public to use the photo for commercial and non-commercial use. I question if that is really what Gruen intended. Copyrighting it that way--unless it is true--opens up the site to legal problems. However, I simply raised the question. Other user spotted it immediately. If it had not been me, it would have been someone else. Now, something I *disagree* with to a degree is that they do not allow fair use images of a person on BLP articles. This is one of the reasons why I spend so much time taking original photos of people myself. I initially fought against the no-fair use images of people argument, but I lost that battle. So, I have spent an inordinate amount of time hunting down and contacting people to take original photos for the site, releasing my own copyright on those photos. Over 500 people. It sucks - but I fought against the policy and lost. The bright side? We have a lot of original content on our site that we, the community, own. Regardless, stop acting like a teenager, stamping your feet because you didn't get your way over a Lennon photo. It's not my doing, it's Wikipedia's. I simply raised the question about the problematic licensing and I was 100% correct to do so. Now continue on in this vein, and you will be blocked. --David Shankbone 17:55, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
And did you issue that same warning to Arcayne? I don't accept the tone he has taken with me. And couldn't you find a friend with a straight cock? Thanks.
Mister ricochet (
talk)
18:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
R. , I respect everything you do. But dammit, I thought you were an admin all the while! You have a way with words. Mister ricochet ( talk) 23:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Do we really need a citation that "Whatever Gets You Thru The Night" hit #1, or that John re-recorded Lucy In The Sky with Elton John? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 23:50, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Removed rec. drug use, was horribly worded, had to go. If anyone is losing sleep over the removal, write a new section, we'll discuss if it has any value. I suggest a quick mention in one of the other sections. That's it. I added citations, removed some, it appeared to be citation bombed which is a no-no (but we love Andreasegde so we'll let that pass) there's a few more cites to go. Let's get him where he should be. Mister ricochet ( talk) 21:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Although we had full permission to use it, someone decided to hassle me once again over the permission. I tried for a few hours to reason with the Wiki powers, but it ain't worth it. I have removed it. So this mediocre page can find a suitably mediocre photo to go with it. Hotcop2 ( talk) 00:02, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
What's "bubelah"? Tvoz says she is occasionally confused by Brit expressions, but I'm non-plussed by this one. Please do tell... :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 09:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
BTW, another disputed photo is in (as if you hadn't noticed :) Why don't we put a new one in every single day? That would confuse the heck out of 'em... (Sound of manic laughing) I'm almost (almost I said) tempted to write, "The removal of this photo is disputed because my mother has it as a magnet photo on her fridge. She likes it, so why don't you?" (I'm being silly, and I profusely apologise.)
Another point: Why is the photo in the infobox always disputed, but other fair use photos in articles are not? Oh-oh; have I just shot myself in the foot? -- andreasegde ( talk) 11:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's go back to the free image of him from the cropped image of him, Yoko and Trudeau. It's noted as "Image:Lennon69.jpg", It can serve until we have an image that is done jumping through all the hoops of Common-ism. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 11:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I have moved the "Rehearsing Give Peace A Chance" photo to the infobox. It's from Commons, it's in colour, it shows Lennon playing guitar, and there is another photo of Lennon and the recording of the song further down. All we have to do is wait for Hotcop to cut through the red tape with a machete, Katana or a pair of sturdy Loppers, and we'll all be as happy as Larry. -- andreasegde ( talk) 12:05, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Getting rid of the "citation needed" is going well, but the "Political activism and the deportation battle" section is full of them. Time to insert refs, or get the scissors out... -- andreasegde ( talk) 00:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I have put Lennon's drug use back in (with a copy-edit) as it is well-referenced by Barry Miles' book, and web pages. if anyone has a problem with that, I suggest they find book references stating that Lennon did not take drugs. McCartney's article has the same section - it went for an FA and none of the editors mentioned the drug section as being a problem.-- andreasegde ( talk) 02:18, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
It is now referenced, but I think it's in the wrong place. Shouldn't there be a section for Lennon and Ono's art stuff? (Bagism, Fly film etc.) -- andreasegde ( talk) 09:58, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
No, I think it's fine where it is. This article needs time continuity for his story to make sense; there are too many "sections" that pull critical things out of context. It wasn't "art" it was Lennon's ploy to receive amnesty as an ambassador to a (conceptual) country (and a great April Fool's prank). Hotcop2 ( talk) 20:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
There are two paragraphs that are not showing up in the article, but are there in the edit. I don't know how to fix this... anyone? Hotcop2 ( talk) 20:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Andreas, Can you move the "Househusband" section up to the end of the 1975 section, so it flows chronologically? Hotcop2 ( talk) 21:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I think there should be a May Pang section after Yoko and before house-husband. She ws there during an important part of his recording career, as well as being his lover, so I think she deserves more than one or two sentences here and there. -- andreasegde ( talk) 23:52, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm going to eliminate this three sentence summary of all the subtexts in this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hotcop2 ( talk • contribs) 01:16, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
You have to sign your comments with four tildes. Mister ricochet ( talk) 01:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The order now (albeit moving toward chronological as Hotcop would like) leaves it confused, as Househusband is way above Yoko Ono. I think I shall step back from this article until a concensus has been reached. Have fun :) -- andreasegde ( talk) 01:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
When we have so many sub-sections, we have decide on a flow. House-husband is in the "career" section because that was his career in the late 70s; we have to fill in the gap from 75-80 (I also changed the years of his solo career from 1970-1975 to 1970-1980 because that's what it was.
There is no way that this article can be completely chronological with all these subdivides. But, as an end section "personal life" it works. Cynthia should technically be in the Beatle section if we're going to be literal.
We have subsections. We have to make each individual subsection work. Hotcop2 ( talk) 01:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree wholeheartedly. His short forty-year life was very complex. Why should his article be any different?
Mister ricochet (
talk)
02:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
LET"S DECIDE ON THE ORDER OF THE SUBSECTIONS Hotcop2 ( talk) 02:07, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
The only thing you might wanna do is move the family up. Mister ricochet ( talk) 02:27, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've rearranged the major sections to what I think makes the most sense flow-wise and topic-wise. Opinions? We can still decide on the order of the less important sections, like Primal Therapy and Pseudonyms. Obviously, memorial would go last, I think Hotcop2 ( talk) 03:03, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I think we're on our way to a somewhat coherant Wiki entry here. if anything it suffers from a little too much micro info; sometimes less is more. After we decide the order, we can suggest deletions or catch duplication, which Andreas has been doing quite nicely. Hotcop2 ( talk) 03:37, 16 December 2007 (UTC) I agree with that. Andreasegde got this thing going. It's finally looking good. Mister ricochet ( talk) 03:59, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I had to revert part of the archive
prematurely performed by Mister Ricochet, as we don't archive recent conversations. As some of those conversations noted Mister ricochet's suspiciously familiar mistakes, I think it needs to still remain in the discussion page for now.
I've also noted that in Mister ricochet's discussion page, he seems to note how he had obtained David Spindel's permission for a John Lennon image, and provided Spindel's email address. Guess who also made such a claim? The
SSP report has been filed, and I will appraise this discussion of the results.-
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
08:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Okay, this is Rumor Control: here are the facts: The user identifying themselves as Mister ricochet has been found by SSP, RFCU and AN/I to be one of a great many sock-puppets for none other than that permanently banned puppetmaster, SixString1965. Hopefully, he will realize that he is always going to be caught, and stops wasting our time. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:12, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
if we really want this article to make sense, we should eliminate the "personal life," put Cynthia and Julian before 1960-1970, put Yoko ono before 1970-1980, and the mention of the "Lost Weekend" as it stands now becomes sufficient. Andrea, you can do the cut/paste and see if it works. Hotcop2 ( talk) 15:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's leave the 'give peace a chance' image in place for a while, until we have something good, free and not subject to any more nonsense. I think Hotcop is going to have his image source submit the old image again, and maybe when it clear WikiCommons anf GDFL, we can use that. Until then, let's hold off on images for a while. Call it a case of once bitten, twice shy, and thrice riding around in a covered PopeMobile. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I learned this from Kingboyk, whilst working on the Paul McCartney Page, and although I disagreed with him at the time, I later understood what he was talking about; he was right.
It deals with Lennon alone, and then what happened around him. It’s hard to do, but one can not make pages chronological, as it makes it too confusing. - [User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] (
talk)
02:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S., From
past experience, I know what I'm on about. :) -[User:Andreasegde|andreasegde]] (
talk)
02:14, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, I've moved stuff about again, as I think it's more readable. The marriages and relationships section is great now, (whoever did it) because My Pang is now in there with the Lost Weekend. The Comeback section is strange, because the stuff in it really belongs elsewhere. -- andreasegde ( talk) 14:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I have moved some of it. -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
After this order thing has been sorted out, it is paramount that we look for citations for everything that needs it, and then some... If something needs a citation, but is not needed, it should be deleted. -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:22, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The Annie Leibovitz quote should go in her own article. Will do it later, but I have to go to the Pain-maker's first (dentist.) :( -- andreasegde ( talk) 15:27, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Sentences containing things like, "rekindled his creativity", "had come to a bitter end", "Lennon delighted at having a ringside seat", "with Lennon at the helm", and "they got together many times", are too flowery and not encyclopedic enough (GA reviewers hate them :)) They would be alright for a biography I suppose, but not for a Pedia. Apologies if that sounds a bit harsh. -- andreasegde ( talk) 14:28, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
there, nothing else to say ;-) Hotcop2 ( talk) 18:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
The "Views on Christianity" section, IMHO, is too long, as it's as long as The Beatles section. -- andreasegde ( talk) 20:29, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
I have cut it back. -- andreasegde ( talk) 21:00, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
It is now 7,786 bytes, which could be made into a new article (it's too long as it is). Any ideas about a title for a new article?... -- andreasegde ( talk) 22:02, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Photos of Lennon and Cynthia are now in, as well as May Pang (thank you for uploading that one Hotcop). -- andreasegde ( talk) 22:36, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
These need work, but especially the first two. -- andreasegde ( talk) 17:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
This the John Lennon talk page. It used to be a hive of activity and opinions - where did everybody go? (Sound of deafening silence...) -- andreasegde ( talk) 18:00, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
yeah the page was changed to "I am a kook"-john lennon and as the page is protected I can't edit it--
12.72.53.178 (
talk)
00:38, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Andreas, You know me better then that. I wouldn't vandalize ANY pages. The problem here is with the editors pissing people off. I was a damn good editor in my time, Then you got jealous people who come in to just stir the pot. I still want to know why nobody especially Arcayne, didn't email Spindel about the picture. Ahh... Good to be back for a minute. And Arc, watch your language. Whatever happened to the holiday spirit? Tvoz, keep cool.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
02:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Of course I'm not going anywhere. But just remember... I would never vandalize any pages. Especially calling JL a kook. Really uncool whoever that was. Anyway, I'll catch you in cyberspace.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Well, it's true. Between you and Hotcop2, the article has some substance and not a jumble of run on sentences. So, keep the excellent work going and for the new year you can give John that GA that everyone is looking for.
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:18, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Let's get JL that GA, Whaddyasay Arcayne?
Innocentvictim (
talk)
03:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
If you like John Lennon (as I'm sure you do, Sixstring/ Innocentvictim) then you have to think about PEACE. That's what he talked/sang about, didn't he? He had a really difficult life when he was young, but he had a vision, and he believed it. What he really said was this: Be honest, but be nice. This thing we are all writing about is not about you and Arcayne, it's about JOHN LENNON, and the Wikipedia article concerning him, and only him. That is what we should be concentrating on. We should co-operate and fight against vandals (who say things like "Lennon and McCartney were homos, dude) and not not fight against each other. I'm very passionate about this, because I really don't like it (and it makes me feel ill). -- andreasegde ( talk) 03:30, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah! Hotcop2 has just put in much-needed references, which is absolutely wonderful. I may give Hotcop2 a Barnstar. Which one, I ask? -- andreasegde ( talk) 03:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)