Talk:Frankie Howerd

message: Frankie revisited A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum in the mid 1980s in London's West End.  The cast also featured Patrick Cargill. 213.104.164.20 15:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum 

message: :Image:RunawayBus.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 02:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:RunawayBus.jpg

message: There is a "Coupling" episode where his voice is discussed, & which I am not familiar with.  Are there stories of his voice?  Why not in the article?
This could use some  grammar:
Throughout his career, Howerd hid his potentially career-destroying homosexuality (which had been illegal in Britain until 1967) from both his audience and his mother. In 1955, Frankie met waiter Dennis Heymer, who later became his manager. Dennis was with Frankie for thirty years, both as lighting operator, manager and partner; until Howerd died.
Dennis was with Frankie for thirty years, as lighting operator, manager and partner, until Howerd died.
 hopiakuta  Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message.  %7e%7e   Thank You. - 14:00, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ coupling_%28UK_TV_series%29 ]] 

message: It says some were offended by his inclusion of a few racist jokes in his revived act.  Who and when?  Can anyone back this up with references? AnthonyEMiller (talk) 17:34, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Racism and revival 

message: I have questioned facts regarding Howerd's education. Can anyone throw more light on this? I am unaware of any connection between Shooters Hill Grammar School and Felsted School. In any case, Felsted School was founded long before Shooters Hill GS; thus the current statement makes no sense. Timothy Titus Talk To TT 11:56, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It has now been removed. Pretty sure it was an error. Timothy Titus Talk To TT 08:59, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Felsted School 

message: It wouldn't have been Howerd's obituary where he was "quoted" praising the late Benny Hill but Hill's.  Even the fact-free tabloids wouldn't be dumb enough to manufacture a quote from Howerd for his own obit. TheOneOnTheLeft (talk) 12:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I remember, what happened was that although Hill died first, his death wasn't discovered for a couple of days. When Howerd died, Hill's agent, not wishing to trouble Hill, provided a tribute to Howerd on behalf of Hill. When it came to light that  Hill had died first, the agent looked a bit foolish. I don't have a source I'm afraid. --John Price (talk) 15:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Howerd/Benny Hill 

message: "his potentially career-destroying homosexuality (which was illegal in Britain until 1967)" is wrong, wrong, wrong and wrong!  So far as I know, homosexuality has never been illegal in Britain.  What was illegal were certain acts between males.  Can someone good with words please change it?  80.2.201.189 (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a silly bit of hair-splitting. It is like saying that murder is legal provided that nobody does any killing! It is certainly true that female homosexuality has never been illegal in the UK; reputedly because Queen Victoria refused to believe that it even existed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.197.4 (talk) 03:17, 19 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Your response is disingenuous. Murder is a verb and a noun, solely related to the act of killing. Homosexuality is a human characteristic, and does not, in itself, imply any particular action or activity. I agree with the OP.ExpatSalopian (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

text: Tend to agree. Maybe "career-destroying homosexuality" does sound a bit odd, even for 1968. But it is now qualified with the more appropriate "(acts between consenting males being illegal in England and Wales until 1967)" ...  Martinevans123 (talk) 19:51, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homosexuality 

message: Has someone got carried away with these? 6, face, film ... surely no other references are needed to understand these terms. --John Price (talk) 15:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Internal links 

message: He was out of the public eye from about 59-63, I'd say. Rothorpe (talk) 23:46, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Disappeared

message: There is no mention of the Frankie Howerd TV series done for the CBC in the 70s called "ooo Canada".173.52.14.89 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 07:54, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  OOO Canada 

message: As I remember, this series was a major comeback for Howerd, and is largely the reason why he is remembered today, yet it barely gets a mention. It deserves a section of its own, since it spawned at least two series and movies, and brought a new audience to Howerd's talents. Rodhullandemu 00:46, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Up Pompeii]] and spin-offs 

message: A long time ago, when I was at secondary school, I remember reading in a magazine about why he changed his name from "Howard" to "Howerd"  - it was cunning ploy to get noticed, being a less common spelling. Bear in mind I must have read that in the early 1980s! If any one knows about this, and has good sources - i.e. why he changed his name - it would be nice if such a Wikipedian could add the essential information to the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, I always assumed he changed it for Equity reasons (like David Walliams and Gorden Kaye), but he changed it so that people would "look twice because they assumed it to be a misprint". Source: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eSIhzKnNUf4C&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236&dq=frankie+howerd+spelling&source=bl&ots=C5HJM4vdjG&sig=fxPsLSb7wU4fG1_EMyJsrT1qqpg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=AAf5TpS1Go_sOaHBqLwB&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=frankie%20howerd%20spelling&f=false 109.176.159.13 (talk) 23:47, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

text: I've added a quote from the ODNB in 'Early career' which also gives the rough time he changed it Cj1340 (talk) 12:48, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another version says he changed it because it was mis-spelt on the sign outside the theatre where he was appearing, and he was so amused he decided to keep it. I'll add the reference when I can find it again; think it was in 'Spike and Co.' 2001:44B8:3102:BB00:C130:615D:915D:3D4D (talk) 06:25, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I guess you mean this book. The same claim, about standing out "down among the wines and spirits" is made by John Fisher's in his 2013 book Funny Way to Be a Hero.  Martinevans123 (talk) 10:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Why he changed his surname to the more unusual spelling

message: I don't think that the film Runaway Bus was low-budget, or could not afford scenery.  There is scenery. The fog was an essential feature of the film.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.41.226 (talk) 09:23, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed that claim was unsourced and was not supported at the The Runaway Bus article. So I have replaced it with a less dubious claim, which is sourced, from that article. Only 4 years later. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's the book on GoogleBooks. But I only get snippet view. And a search for "Runway" does not produce those particular facts for me. Maybe it works for you? Or maybe you have a copy to hand? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If you cannot see the reference in the book, why did you add it as a source...? The Bounder (talk) 21:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Runaway Bus 

message: The edit I reverted had no summary. I reverted with the edit summary "so what's wrong with that source?" This was re-reverted with the summary "Reverted good faith edits by Martinevans123: Perhaps a talk page discussion, rather than edit warring to add the least useful piece of information about Howerd. The poorly formatted cite should also be in the text, not here." So, who's "edit warring" exactly? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of us, obviously. - The Bounder (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, right. Glad no-one else is involved. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: And since when did this pass muster as a source? Is it a book, tv programme, newspaper article or smoke signals? - The Bounder (talk) 20:33, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You need the thread above? Or is this just a general session of "I know best"? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:AGF. – The Bounder (talk) 20:50, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:AGF. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:52, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

text: My !vote would be not in the infobox. It's not terribly useful or germane, and not a key fact that's aids understanding to him as a person or entertainer. - The Bounder (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

text: My !vote would be to try and achieve consensus to add to the text, probably immediately at the end of the existing Death section, and reconsider after that. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already in the body of the article. It needs a source, but the facts are there. – The Bounder (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see that his grave is part of his "legacy". Unless there was some extraordinarily long time between death and burial (and I can't find any suggestion of that), I think it belongs in the Death section. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:32, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I have just left a note at User talk:Elisa.rolle inviting an input to this discussion. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

text: Thanks. So I have removed "The two were buried together in a replica Egyptian sarcophagus" as unsupported. But when and where exactly did Heyner marry "Chris"? Maybe this detail is worthy of a footnote, just to explain the circumstances of Howerd's burial. I must say I'm somewhat intrigued to know where the Egyptian sarcophagus story came from. I mean, who would just invent a story like that? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: p.s. exactly why is: "Wilson, Scott. ‘‘Resting Places: The Burial Sites of More Than 14,000 Famous Persons’’, 3d ed.: 2 (Kindle Locations 22383-22384). McFarland & Company, Inc., Publishers. Kindle Edition" not considered a reliable source? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:58, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Scott Wilson (which is a very expensive book I own) was not considered reliable by The Bounder, and I did not want to edit war with him, so I replaced the source. As for the burial places, you can see Heymer's here: https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/find-a-grave-prod/photos/2009/363/46140921_126220358096.jpg, you can see the name of Chris Byrne in the foot of the tombstone. Howerd is here: https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/find-a-grave-prod/photos/2006/24/23389_113818464633.jpg. They were initially buried together, but Howerd's sister denied Byrne to put the name of Heymer on the tombstone, therefore Byrne reburied Heymer in his own tomb: http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/exhumation-wish/story-12317557-detail/story.html--Elisa.rolle (talk) 23:01, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, it gets even more convoluted. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:03, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

text: *So you're happy for the Wilson source to be re-used? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *I have absolutely no problem with it being used in the body of the text. - The Bounder (talk) 08:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *I've re-added it, but into the text, to directly support the claim. Feel free to improve the ref format if you think it doesn't "pass muster". Martinevans123 (talk) 08:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

text: For me, still no, for the same reasons above. Infoboxes do not need to carry every single tiny detail, particularly the least important ones that do not aid understanding to him as a person or entertainer. - The Bounder (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree it's the "least important" detail. And infoboxes are not permitted to include " every single tiny detail", for very good reason. But I'm tempted to add it here, given the unusual circumstances of Howerd's burial arrangements. So it looks like User:Elisa.rolle may have the casting !vote here, if they feel the need, of course? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An infobox is not for "unusual circumstances", which are better described in text, not in short facts. According to MOS:INFOBOX an infobox "summarizes key features of the page's subject", and this is not a key feature, from which ever angle you look at it. And no, no single user gets a "casting vote", particularly one you have invited to join the thread (you can see how that looks, can't you), and particularly in a thread with only three people. An RfC would be a better way to approach this, based on leaving the infobox in its current form until a consensus is formed. - The Bounder (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An infobox is not just for Christmas, either. I was certainly hoping for consensus. But an RfC is fine by me. I think maybe you should have invited User:Elisa.rolle here, long before I did? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: For me is fine either way. I prefer an infobox (I looked them from my android and they look really nice, more easy to read than scrolling through the text). But this is my opinion. As I said, I do not want to start a war over this. So if The Bounder strongly feel as not to have it, and Martinevans123 has kindly included the info in the text (and now is also correct, before it was not), I'm fine to leave it like this. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

text: *No, you don't dare, do you. And yes, we all know Frankie's well and truly over the dam, thanks. But you're right, anything in the box also needs to be in the article and supported with sources. :) Martinevans123 (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *So "resting place" is incorrect then, would you say? CassiantoTalk 19:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *I could have sworn that debate was already had elsewhere. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *It was, and it applies very much here, too. CassiantoTalk 20:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *So perhaps we all agree to not add "Place of burial" and to definitely not add "Resting place"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resting place 

message: Back to the reason for the original thread. Should "Resting place", which is now fully sourced in the text, with quite a lot of extra detail as it turns out, also appear in the info box? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:49, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: For me, still no, for the same reasons above. Infoboxes do not need to carry every single tiny detail, particularly the least important ones that do not aid understanding to him as a person or entertainer. - The Bounder (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I agree it's the "least important" detail. And infoboxes are not permitted to include " every single tiny detail", for very good reason. But I'm tempted to add it here, given the unusual circumstances of Howerd's burial arrangements. So it looks like User:Elisa.rolle may have the casting !vote here, if they feel the need, of course? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An infobox is not for "unusual circumstances", which are better described in text, not in short facts. According to MOS:INFOBOX an infobox "summarizes key features of the page's subject", and this is not a key feature, from which ever angle you look at it. And no, no single user gets a "casting vote", particularly one you have invited to join the thread (you can see how that looks, can't you), and particularly in a thread with only three people. An RfC would be a better way to approach this, based on leaving the infobox in its current form until a consensus is formed. - The Bounder (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: An infobox is not just for Christmas, either. I was certainly hoping for consensus. But an RfC is fine by me. I think maybe you should have invited User:Elisa.rolle here, long before I did? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: For me is fine either way. I prefer an infobox (I looked them from my android and they look really nice, more easy to read than scrolling through the text). But this is my opinion. As I said, I do not want to start a war over this. So if The Bounder strongly feel as not to have it, and Martinevans123 has kindly included the info in the text (and now is also correct, before it was not), I'm fine to leave it like this. --Elisa.rolle (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

text: *No, you don't dare, do you. And yes, we all know Frankie's well and truly over the dam, thanks. But you're right, anything in the box also needs to be in the article and supported with sources. :) Martinevans123 (talk) 19:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *So "resting place" is incorrect then, would you say? CassiantoTalk 19:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *I could have sworn that debate was already had elsewhere. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *It was, and it applies very much here, too. CassiantoTalk 20:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: *So perhaps we all agree to not add "Place of burial" and to definitely not add "Resting place"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: The opening paragraph on this page bothers me.  Basically this guys career did span sixty years, and he was a popular figure.  The Barry Cryer description of his career as ‘a series of comebacks’ is a bit of an insult. Especially given the fact that I suspect Frankie Howerd was/is significantly more well known than Barry Cryer. 
Would we allow the opening paragraph of Bruce Forsyth Wikipedia entry to read ‘ had a career spanning seventy years, described by David Wallisms as “a bit mediocre”.’?
Unless anyone disagrees strongly, I’d like to remove this reference from the page. 
I suspect Mr Cryer would not mind. Miami Jackson (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree; there are certainly better quotes out there, but I don't think we should remove it altogether.  Maybe put it in a section below - a legacy section, perhaps, if it has one? CassiantoTalk 20:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Barry cryer 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Frankie Howard (footballer) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 00:07, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress