![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As of 25.06.2006 it is interesting that Osborne´s disowning of his daughter Nolan, presumably because she was non-intellectual, has been airbrushed out: see earlier versions. Why the hagiography? The same problem occurs, after all, in the life of Ingmar Bergman: questionable personal behaviour as against Great Art.
Was his "serious liver crisis" the result of alcohol? Lestrade ( talk) 16:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
Apart from Nolan, mentioned in the article, did J. Osborne have any other child? -- 80.36.68.39 ( talk) 07:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
User:NorthLondoner are you proposing to add a screen's worth of quotations for each of Osborne's wives? If so, I'd find that excessive -- the Ure material is of interest but highly selective. If you aren't proposing to add more wives to this compilation, could you possibly explain here why you single out Mary Ure for this treatment? -- El Ingles ( talk) 19:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi El Ingles, I am proposing to add all pertinent quotations relating to his wives, from 'Almost a Gentleman', Ure simply comes first due to chronology. The quotations about Ure are interesting as they represent his opinions on her (which can be taken in the context of his opinions of women in general) and insight into their relationship and hence his life.
Naturally anything I put there is open to editing / collaboration and if you propose any of the Ure material for deletion then let's discuss that and work towards making the section on Osborne's relationships concise yet also comprehensive.
One thing I wanted to do was gives some 'nicer' quotations to balance out both the negative things Osborne says about Ure and especially Bennett.
Always grateful for feedback! NorthLondoner ( talk) 20:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll be focusing on wives but also adding in relevant mistresses. Given the amount of polemic on the subject there is justification for expansion on biographical grounds and because much of what Osborne wrote on the subject is very quotable, but only in context, therefore adds to character portrait.
Anyhow, enough to be getting on with for now. NorthLondoner ( talk) 22:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
As the editor who wrote the original brief Personal life section, I'm not delighted by NorthLondoner's work. Just as I feared, it is not in keeping with either the rest of this article or with articles about comparable British playwrights (cf., for example, Arnold Wesker, Lindsay Anderson, Edward Bond, Peter Gill). I seek consensus to revert the entire exercise. -- El Ingles ( talk) 15:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Why don't we let NorthLondoner finish it and then have a look at it all again? Agree with him that the women in his life are more important to his development than for some other playwrights - but surely you must do his relationship with Nellie Beatrice too? vultureofbook ~~
Late contribution to this discussion. Personally I don't think the space currently given to Osborne's various wives is inappropriate, since the man's lovelife was given a great deal of coverage after he became a literary celebrity, and in a sense this is part of his legacy: as I recall, it occupied a major part of the 1991 South Bank Show documentary about him broadcast to tie in with the premiere of Déjàvu. As the article currently stands, however, it's disproportionate to the space given to his work (rather than his life), which is somewhat skimmed over. The section titled "Critical responses..." doesn't currently cite a single critical response! I would be in favour of expanding the rest of the article rather than trimming the bit on Osborne's wives. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 00:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
What about... England, My England (1995)? -- 194.144.23.124 ( talk) 08:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
We are told that Osborne was the "first" to oppose "monarchy". I thought that there was something against monarchy in the 17th century in Britain. This included a Civil War. I want less spamming for Osborne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.54.79 ( talk) 15:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:John Osborne/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
close to 'b' rating, but lacks: images, person infobox, navbox --
Sapphic
00:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Looking good, but it would still be better to have a photo before trying for Good Article status. Surely there must be at least one that can be used? -- Sapphic 22:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
|
Last edited at 22:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Osborne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Greetings, fellow Wikipedians! I can see that much effort has been expended on writing (and debating the content in) this article. For that I salute you. It's well-written. But it seems to me that it contains too many unsourced statements. For example:
Perhaps all of this is factual, well-known or accepted by current literary thinking on Osborne. But it does not belong in Wikipedia unless it can be attributed to reliable, authoritative sources. It is inconsistent with Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" requirement, which states "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources...Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong." See Wikipedia:Five Pillars.
I am happy to leave these statements in the article if someone will provide citations ( e.g. statements by published authors, newspaper articles, academic journals, etc.) to support them. If that doesn't happen within one week from today, I propose to delete them. Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 ( talk) 13:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I have a copy of Almost a Gentleman and I'll try to find time to forestall your slash-and-burn campaign. Stu ( talk) 14:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
On the subject of unsourced statements, where does Osborne's self-description as "a radical who hates change" originally come from? This is one of many facts and quotations from the ODNB entry on Osborne that were incorporated into the article when it was expanded in 2007, but I have a feeling that these are the words of Jimmy Porter in Déjàvu, rather than Osborne himself precisely. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 19:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
I would say around half of the sources used in this article all link to John Heilpern's 2006 biography of John Osborne. This gives me some concern. Firstly, relying so much on one source is generally not ideal, but secondly, there are many claims in this article (some of which I removed) that seem highly subjective and I am not sure that this book can be relied on to give factual and unbiased pieces of information.
Providing more alternative sources would be helpful, if someone is willing to do so.
Thanks. A. E. Katz ( talk) 03:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
I've just been reading the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry on Osborne, and there are plenty of places where this article (in its current state) seems to lift whole phrases and sentences verbatim, e.g. this passage on his later life: "Through the 1980s Osborne played the role of Shropshire squire with great pleasure and a heavy slosh of irony. He wrote a diary for The Spectator. He opened his garden to raise money for the church roof, from which he threatened to withdraw covenant-funding unless the vicar restored the Book of Common Prayer." I think a thorough edit of this article would only be fair to Michael Ratcliffe, the author, as he isn't credited anywhere. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 22:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$ion
The Osborne quote about Max Miller currently occupies a slightly disproportionate place in a section about his heroes/role models (being the only one), and I would have thought a few theatre professionals (George Devine) and playwrights (Strindberg?) would make more sense. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 15:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
The lead section of this article says, accurately, that Osborne became notorious for the violence of his language not only in relation to politics but also against members of his family. The Wikipedia manual, no less than common sense, consequently requires the article to outline his political views in more depth than the one sentence in the section "Critical Responses, Idols and Effect" that outlined them in the article as it stood at the beginning of March 2023, so I have expanded this sentence into two paragraphs and made it a separate section. Because Wikipedia guidelines also say, reasonably, that the better an article is the more structure it will have, I've made it part of the "Personal Life" section, going ahead of the space devoted to Osborne's five marriages (I think this is the structure suggested by the lead section, and also by Osborne's life and career itself). Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 15:09, 9 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
First of all I'd like to apologise to another contributor for reverting a change they've made, but I think the line in the lead section about Osborne being notorious for the violence of his language should be allowed to stand. The violence of his language against ex-wives and his mother is illustrated in several places in the article (particularly 'Personal Life'); the violence of his language re: politics I believe can be backed up by expanding the 'Politics' section, which I think should be done by citing, briefly, his contribution to Tom Maschler's 1957 Declaration anthology and the 1961 'Letter to My Fellow Countrymen'. I'm hoping to make these changes to the 'Politics' section quite soon, within a week or so, and would ask them for patience in the meantime. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 21:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
While fixing the rest of the article is a bit beyond me alone at this time, I had a go at expanding the introdution. Original was very bare bones, this one actually mentions that he won a Tony and an Oscar, among other things. FreeBard42 ( talk) 21:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As of 25.06.2006 it is interesting that Osborne´s disowning of his daughter Nolan, presumably because she was non-intellectual, has been airbrushed out: see earlier versions. Why the hagiography? The same problem occurs, after all, in the life of Ingmar Bergman: questionable personal behaviour as against Great Art.
Was his "serious liver crisis" the result of alcohol? Lestrade ( talk) 16:32, 25 November 2007 (UTC)Lestrade
Apart from Nolan, mentioned in the article, did J. Osborne have any other child? -- 80.36.68.39 ( talk) 07:48, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
User:NorthLondoner are you proposing to add a screen's worth of quotations for each of Osborne's wives? If so, I'd find that excessive -- the Ure material is of interest but highly selective. If you aren't proposing to add more wives to this compilation, could you possibly explain here why you single out Mary Ure for this treatment? -- El Ingles ( talk) 19:30, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi El Ingles, I am proposing to add all pertinent quotations relating to his wives, from 'Almost a Gentleman', Ure simply comes first due to chronology. The quotations about Ure are interesting as they represent his opinions on her (which can be taken in the context of his opinions of women in general) and insight into their relationship and hence his life.
Naturally anything I put there is open to editing / collaboration and if you propose any of the Ure material for deletion then let's discuss that and work towards making the section on Osborne's relationships concise yet also comprehensive.
One thing I wanted to do was gives some 'nicer' quotations to balance out both the negative things Osborne says about Ure and especially Bennett.
Always grateful for feedback! NorthLondoner ( talk) 20:42, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll be focusing on wives but also adding in relevant mistresses. Given the amount of polemic on the subject there is justification for expansion on biographical grounds and because much of what Osborne wrote on the subject is very quotable, but only in context, therefore adds to character portrait.
Anyhow, enough to be getting on with for now. NorthLondoner ( talk) 22:10, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
As the editor who wrote the original brief Personal life section, I'm not delighted by NorthLondoner's work. Just as I feared, it is not in keeping with either the rest of this article or with articles about comparable British playwrights (cf., for example, Arnold Wesker, Lindsay Anderson, Edward Bond, Peter Gill). I seek consensus to revert the entire exercise. -- El Ingles ( talk) 15:09, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Why don't we let NorthLondoner finish it and then have a look at it all again? Agree with him that the women in his life are more important to his development than for some other playwrights - but surely you must do his relationship with Nellie Beatrice too? vultureofbook ~~
Late contribution to this discussion. Personally I don't think the space currently given to Osborne's various wives is inappropriate, since the man's lovelife was given a great deal of coverage after he became a literary celebrity, and in a sense this is part of his legacy: as I recall, it occupied a major part of the 1991 South Bank Show documentary about him broadcast to tie in with the premiere of Déjàvu. As the article currently stands, however, it's disproportionate to the space given to his work (rather than his life), which is somewhat skimmed over. The section titled "Critical responses..." doesn't currently cite a single critical response! I would be in favour of expanding the rest of the article rather than trimming the bit on Osborne's wives. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 00:55, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
What about... England, My England (1995)? -- 194.144.23.124 ( talk) 08:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
We are told that Osborne was the "first" to oppose "monarchy". I thought that there was something against monarchy in the 17th century in Britain. This included a Civil War. I want less spamming for Osborne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.54.79 ( talk) 15:42, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:John Osborne/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Comment(s) | Press [show] to view → |
---|---|
close to 'b' rating, but lacks: images, person infobox, navbox --
Sapphic
00:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Looking good, but it would still be better to have a photo before trying for Good Article status. Surely there must be at least one that can be used? -- Sapphic 22:03, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
|
Last edited at 22:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 20:19, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Osborne. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Greetings, fellow Wikipedians! I can see that much effort has been expended on writing (and debating the content in) this article. For that I salute you. It's well-written. But it seems to me that it contains too many unsourced statements. For example:
Perhaps all of this is factual, well-known or accepted by current literary thinking on Osborne. But it does not belong in Wikipedia unless it can be attributed to reliable, authoritative sources. It is inconsistent with Wikipedia's "neutral point of view" requirement, which states "All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing reliable, authoritative sources...Editors' personal experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong." See Wikipedia:Five Pillars.
I am happy to leave these statements in the article if someone will provide citations ( e.g. statements by published authors, newspaper articles, academic journals, etc.) to support them. If that doesn't happen within one week from today, I propose to delete them. Cordially, BuzzWeiser196 ( talk) 13:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I have a copy of Almost a Gentleman and I'll try to find time to forestall your slash-and-burn campaign. Stu ( talk) 14:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
On the subject of unsourced statements, where does Osborne's self-description as "a radical who hates change" originally come from? This is one of many facts and quotations from the ODNB entry on Osborne that were incorporated into the article when it was expanded in 2007, but I have a feeling that these are the words of Jimmy Porter in Déjàvu, rather than Osborne himself precisely. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 19:29, 8 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 01:07, 11 January 2020 (UTC)
I would say around half of the sources used in this article all link to John Heilpern's 2006 biography of John Osborne. This gives me some concern. Firstly, relying so much on one source is generally not ideal, but secondly, there are many claims in this article (some of which I removed) that seem highly subjective and I am not sure that this book can be relied on to give factual and unbiased pieces of information.
Providing more alternative sources would be helpful, if someone is willing to do so.
Thanks. A. E. Katz ( talk) 03:10, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
I've just been reading the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography entry on Osborne, and there are plenty of places where this article (in its current state) seems to lift whole phrases and sentences verbatim, e.g. this passage on his later life: "Through the 1980s Osborne played the role of Shropshire squire with great pleasure and a heavy slosh of irony. He wrote a diary for The Spectator. He opened his garden to raise money for the church roof, from which he threatened to withdraw covenant-funding unless the vicar restored the Book of Common Prayer." I think a thorough edit of this article would only be fair to Michael Ratcliffe, the author, as he isn't credited anywhere. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 22:21, 15 March 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$ion
The Osborne quote about Max Miller currently occupies a slightly disproportionate place in a section about his heroes/role models (being the only one), and I would have thought a few theatre professionals (George Devine) and playwrights (Strindberg?) would make more sense. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 15:49, 10 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
The lead section of this article says, accurately, that Osborne became notorious for the violence of his language not only in relation to politics but also against members of his family. The Wikipedia manual, no less than common sense, consequently requires the article to outline his political views in more depth than the one sentence in the section "Critical Responses, Idols and Effect" that outlined them in the article as it stood at the beginning of March 2023, so I have expanded this sentence into two paragraphs and made it a separate section. Because Wikipedia guidelines also say, reasonably, that the better an article is the more structure it will have, I've made it part of the "Personal Life" section, going ahead of the space devoted to Osborne's five marriages (I think this is the structure suggested by the lead section, and also by Osborne's life and career itself). Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 15:09, 9 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
First of all I'd like to apologise to another contributor for reverting a change they've made, but I think the line in the lead section about Osborne being notorious for the violence of his language should be allowed to stand. The violence of his language against ex-wives and his mother is illustrated in several places in the article (particularly 'Personal Life'); the violence of his language re: politics I believe can be backed up by expanding the 'Politics' section, which I think should be done by citing, briefly, his contribution to Tom Maschler's 1957 Declaration anthology and the 1961 'Letter to My Fellow Countrymen'. I'm hoping to make these changes to the 'Politics' section quite soon, within a week or so, and would ask them for patience in the meantime. Per$1$tenceofv1$1on ( talk) 21:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)Per$1$tenceofv1$1on
While fixing the rest of the article is a bit beyond me alone at this time, I had a go at expanding the introdution. Original was very bare bones, this one actually mentions that he won a Tony and an Oscar, among other things. FreeBard42 ( talk) 21:54, 17 October 2023 (UTC)