Talk:John Lennon/Archive 2

message: John Lennon was NOT assassinated he was murdered. Please look up a defination before changing it back. I know assassination sounds cooler and brings more meaning to his death but he was killed in cold blood by a nut case.
Definition of assassination: "To murder (a prominent person) by surprise attack."  I THINK that applies to Lennon.
:The most commonly recognized definition of assassination, The killing of a political leader or other public figure.  Doesn't apply.  Do not change in the article unless a consensus is reached on this talk page that it's proper.  I think not. — Kbh3rdtalk 05:01, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ASSASSINATION

message: The article says "Reportedly, the song playing on the hospital tannoy at the moment of Lennon's death was a Beatles hit, "All My Loving"."  Except from context, I would have no clue as to what "tannoy" meant. It's not in my dictionary, either. Presumably it means "music system": is it a British word? We ought to change it to something comprehensible: I'm certain no one at Roosevelt Hospital believes they have a "tannoy". -- Nunh-huh 17:36, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Tannoy, in this case, is not interpretable by context.  I interpret it as a music system or record player based on the context, not a public address system as tannoy defines it.  Nunh-huh, this thread's parent, seems to share the same sentiment.  The article needs to be changed as a more common English phrase is needed to describe the hospital's tannoy. - Defunkt (talk) 08:59, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I didn't want to say "muzak", but that's what it was, even if not Muzak as such. I meant the PA system that plays background music in the halls and wards. Let's just say public-address system.
My source for the report that "All My Loving" was playing as John died was a television reporter who was in the next cubicle in the ER with a broken leg from a motorcycle accident. He recognized Yoko running into the ER following someone on a stretcher who he assumed had to be John, and a short time later heard "All My Loving" start up, followed by a scream from Yoko as doctors told her John had died. He called in the report to New York's WCBS-2. This was covered in Rolling Stone and I believe in a subsequent issue of TV Guide. I wish I could think of the guy's name. All my Lennon scrapbooks are still packed in some damn box or other after a cross-country move. --Bluejay Young 04:41, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)
Tannoy is a brand name like Hoover is to a vacuum Cleaner so the term Lound Speaker system or P.A. system should be used.
Sorry, the hospital was in America, it makes no sense to use a word that American's don't use to describe something that took place at an American hospital, all arguements as to who's country is better aside. Crestville this isn' the place for your opinions. --24.218.44.240 03:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: tannoy

message: ...is incorrect, as far as I know - if the text really means that John SAW his mother die, as I think it means. According to the Paul McCartney biography written by Barry Miles, John was waiting for her mother in her mother's house at the time.
Yeah, she's just left his Aunt Mimis house and I think Johnwas either at his aunts house or his mothers house. Either way, he definately didn't see it. His mate was there though.--Crestville 22:31, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The young Lennon was unfortunate enough to witness this event" 

message: I think it became a dark day in music history when Lennon died.  The fact that Dimebag got killed on the same day makes it something more than dark, but I'm not sure what.  Just saying the sentence makes me think the author felt the day wasn't dark until Dimebag's death. - Defunkt (talk) 02:26, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Darker?--Crestville 00:59, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "making it a truly dark day in Music History" 

message: Should the discography be moved to a page of its own like it has been done for Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr?  --DaveGorman 12:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Discography

message: As Ono went in, Lennon got out of the car, and saw Chapman waiting in the shadows. Recognizing him from many hours earlier, Lennon was instantly aware that something was not quite right. He gave Chapman a long, hard stare, but went on through the entrance to the Datoka.
... Okay, guys.  Wow.  Don't think we need this. --Thorns Among Our Leaves 21:08, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a bloody murder mystery

message: Wow, don't know why, but the information previously buried in the "Trivia" section, claiming that Lennon may have supported the IRA, is very unbalanced. (I checked here after seeing another Wikipedia page claiming that Lennon had - full stop, had, not "was claimed to have" - given money to a Marxist IRA organization.) The previous entry was linked to the first BBC story with David Shayler's claim ... but did not mention any of the other pertinent details (aka, Shayler's in deep doo-doo for breaching the Official Secrets Act, and not necessarily trustworthy ... Lennon's biographer has been fighting for FBI files for over twenty years ... The "proof" may have been in MI5 files, after being passed from the FBI ... the same FBI which erroneously reported information on "enemies" in the past (eg Jean Seberg). 
Now, Lennon might have supported the IRA after all, but what was written exercised quite a bit of "selective omission". 67.10.136.147 07:46, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Info about Lennon and the IRA - definitely not "NPOV"

message: Are the conspiracy theories really notable enough to warrant their inclusion here? Is there any serious scholarship that believes Lennon's murder was a political assassination, or is this another case of Area 51-style cranks not taking their meds?—chris.lawson (talk) 06:37, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conspiracy theories 

message: Spam? It's difficuly to call a heart-felt attempt to remember the great man and his immortal message "spam". I'm sorry, but I believe the petition deserves a mention in the intro of the article not just for it's own sake, but as a testimony of the sheer vastness of John's popularity and political influence. You mention how he made the list of top Britons by BBC, yet you reserve a movement to name a holiday after him (perhaps one of the greatest honours) for the external links section. I fail to see your logic, please reconsider.
--Wikiuser 7 18:56, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Today is a bad day to edit this article, so save your edit for another day, perhaps. There's rampant vandalism due to the "current event"-like nature of the article, and we're busy fixing it. You edit may get rolled back in the process, but worse, it makes it harder fo us to sift through the history if we need to separate the vandals from the well-meaning editors. -- Enno 22:14, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Lennon Day - Not Spam 

message: Given the 5 Wiki pillars, the first paragraph on Lennon here: "heavily influenced rock music" is ludicrously inadequate in summing up his and his fellow Beatles' revolutionary development of popular music. I make this obvious point to illustrate a criticism I have of Wikipedia: the almost unfailing blandness of many of the entries. 
The problem of verification of subjective standpoints is obviously one that can lead to a lot of wayward writing, but it seems to me that this has led, most unfortunately, to a dismal timidity and conservatism in the critical (critical as in evaluative sense)approach of the writers. If young people seeking to understand the impact made by leading artist of - in this case - the 20th century, then they sadly won't receive much of an education here. Whilst W. is hugely important as a provider of facts, and I don't undervalue this, but that's all it is. And in the case of Lennon, you can make the most enormous claims imaginable for his importance as a songwriter, singer and cultural leader in the 1960s, and have 100s of music scholars across the globe agreeing with you (the same is true for Dylan and countless other artists in W.)
So this is a plea for a bolder approach from the senior bods at Wikipedia; boldness is encouraged in one of the pillars, SO LET'S HAVE SOME.
Thoss 00:25, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The NPOV policy is a "bigger" pillar, though. This is not a review site, so we try to stay away from unnecessary praise and let the facts about the subject speak for themself. See Wikipedia:Avoid peacock terms. It's funny that you bring up Dylan because there has been an ugly battle over the first paragraph of that article for months. Maybe you'd like to weigh in on that dispute. And last, there is no such thing as "senior bods" here. You can improve this article however you like, you don't need to be a long-time user. Rhobite 15:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timid, Conservative, Critical Assessment 

message: It is stated that John Lennon didn't appear on The Simpsons. However, I distincly remember years ago reading somewhere that Matt Groening had put him secretly into some episode, and that he was actually in the show, but did not reveal which episode. Can someone look into this?
I think images & impressions of lennon have appeard in the simpsons frequently, but I'm guessing this refferet to the actual person voicing themselves. The creators of the simpsons are quite proud that McCartney, Harrison and Starr have all actually voiced themselves on the show. Lennon, however, was unable to do so due to previous comittments (i.e. haveing died some 10 years before the series started). In that sense, he is the only beatle to never have apeeared on the simpsons.--Crestville 13:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivia: simpsons 

message: I strongly suggest splitting the accounts of this 'controversy' away from the biographical section into a completely new article.  It is a very minot episode which is given undue prominence in the context of Lennon's life and work with the Beatles, disturbs the account and has no clear ending, and is equally relevant to discussion of the Beatles.
80.44.175.87 20:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Bigger than Jesus' material deserves own article 

message: While there is no known connection between the murders of Lennon and Dimebag Darrell other than the date, it is absolutely worth mentioning in the trivia section, because both murders will be recounted and remembered by the media from now on.  Somebody playing thought police keeps editing this trivia item out; it's at least as useful as half of the other trivia items. Earpol 00:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trivial coincidence between murders John Lennon and Dimebag Darrell 

message: The trivia section in this article is pretty awful. Everyman and his dog has put how their next door neighbour saw John eat a Kebab whilst singing Stairway to Heaven in 1977. Maybe this could be moved elsewhere - in my opinion it is not very encyclopedic to have a trivia section. Jgritz 03:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much bad Trivia 

message: A large chunk of the murder section seems to be copied from this NYTimes article -
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/nyregion/08lennon.html - and probably needs a rewrite before it is discovered. Jgritz 06:28, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright issues with article 

message: "In the late afternoon of 8 December 1980, in New York City, fan Mark David Chapman..."
Sorry, but Chapman wasn't a fan of Lennon's when he shot him. I can see why this causes confusion though, as he was around Beatlemania and in his college days, but he went off him around the time of his conversion to Christianity. He killed Lennon because he saw him as a phoney.
:Here is a point about this particular issue.  A TRUE fan of John Lennon would not have murdered him in cold blood!  I admired the man and had I been there on the fateful night near enough I would've jumped Chapman to prevent the event.  In other words I would have made an attempt to protect John and Yoko.  Yoko could've gotten murdered as well.  Then little Sean Lennon would've grown up without his Dad or his Mom.  It is simply a tradegy.
--Bumpusmills1 18:12, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapman Wasn't a Fan 

message: Books by Albert Goldman and Geoffrey Guiliano?  Anyone who knows anything about Beatles history would not include these authors in recommended Beatle reading lists.
:Might I inquire as too the book titles of these two authors on The Beatles?
--Bumpusmills1 05:47, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recommended Reading?

message: I agree with Zachary and others that these conspiracy theories are sick. My question is why should they be allowed on other pages (but not here)? Perhaps we can come up with one single policy? gidonb 11:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon, yes I understand that. However, some believe that these theories should not be included in this article. I wish to figure out why. Perhaps we can come up with one policy for all such cases. Even better, perhaps such a policy exists already and I can apply it across the board. Too many of these theories pop up lately, in many cases related to the same imaginative person you now quote. gidonb 17:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: OK The proper place to list this information is List of John Lennon Trivia. It is already listed at this page. As a rule we try to keep these sort of accusations out of our main articles, but rather include them in articles dedicated to such theories, trivia articles and the like. gidonb 15:55, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Conspiracy theory

message: Q: "You're very aware of everything around you."
GEORGE: "Yeah."
JOHN: (giggling) "I think you've got to be, you know. You might get shot." 
(laughter)
ADELAIDE, June 12, 1964   Adelaide Press Conference
Strange..  FranksValli 12:09, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another strange quote about his death 

message: A reader has contacted the help desk saying that the quote from Howard Cosell is actually wrong and that Cosell actually stated that Lennon had been "shot twice in the back". Could someone please check the quote?
Capitalistroadster 07:51, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cosell quote

message: Has anyone heard about this psychic that supposedly channels John Lennon from the Afterlife? Ekiatoui 02:21, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How is old Ringo?--Crestville 18:51, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Linda Polley 

message: He changed his name to John Ono Lennon by deed poll. There is an external reference to this at the bottom of the main article.
A search for "John Ono Lennon" in Google gets 12,000 hits; "John Winston Ono Lennon" gets 973.
Some people insist the latter is correct - Crestville changed the main article saying "he wasn't allowed to drop Winston" - but who can say you're not allowed to - you can call yourself anything you want. Diverman 03:06, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: British Law says you can't, therefore legaly he would still have been Winston. Also, I don't think he even tried to drop Winston. Read Lennon: The Definitive Biography by Ray Coleman as this is the source of my knowlege.--Crestville 00:22, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the info Crestville. I still have a book at home about the Beatles and I thought it said it was changed to "John Ono Lennon", I'll have to check, it was several years ago! I noticed a fan changed his name to "John Ono Lennon" by deed poll a few years back.  Maybe someone from the UK can explain the name change by deed poll laws there.Diverman 02:28, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: *Well, clearly, Lennon wanted to be called John Ono Lennon. However, this may or may not have been his legal name. He was free to name his child after what he wished his name whether or not it was really his name. Folkor 06:28, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Volume 2 of the above mentioned Lennon Biog, is entitled, "John Ono Lennon" Lion King 18:04, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  From my knowledge, John's full name would be "John Winston Ono Lennon".  I believe at one time he wanted to drop "Winston" because it refered to Winston Churchill.  But he kept the name because it was given to him by his mother.  If my memory serves me, I read it in the book Meet the Beatles: A cultural history of the band that shook youth, gender, and the world by Steven D. Stark.  I'll have to reread the wikipedia article to see if anything was mentioned about this.  If not, I may add it sometime?  --Jude 01:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  John's Full name 

message: John Lennon was murdered.Lion King 00:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but he died in the process.--Crestville 12:32, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Did he? Well, you live and learn, lol.Lion King 12:42, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Died?

message: On the 23rd Aug. 1974 at 9 o'clock I saw a U.F.O. - J.L.
That little blurb is written as a note in John Lennon's Walls and Bridges album. Lennon went further to describe his sighting in the November, 1974 issue of Andy Warhol's Interview, VOL. IV NO. 11.
Q. Now that you've been living in N.Y. 3 years, do you still....
A. If you look closely at the wonderful "Walls And Bridges", out now, album package, you will  notice a little notice saying, "I saw a U.F.O...." why don't you ask me about that?
Q. Oh, I hadn't noticed, did you really... were you drunk? high? having a primal?
A. No. Actually I was very straight. I was lying naked on my bed, when I had this urge...
Q. Don't we all...?
A. So I went to the window, just dreaming around in my usual poetic frame of mind, to cut a long short story, there, as I turned my head, hovering over the next building, no more than a hundred feet away was this thing... with ordinary electric light bulbs flashing on and off round the bottom, one non blinking red light on top.... what the Nixon is that! I says to myself (for no one else was there)... is it a helicopter? No! It makes no noise... ah then, it must be a balloon! (Frantically trying to rationalize it, in all my too human way) but no!! Balloons don't look like that, nor do they fly so low, yes folks, it was flying (very slow, about 30 m.p.h.) below.... I repeat, below most roof tops (i.e. higher than the 'old building' lower than the 'new'.) all the time it was there, I never took my eyes off it, but I did scream to a friend who was in another room "Come and look at this" etc. etc. My friend came running and bore witness with me. Nobody else was around. We tried to take pictures (shit on my polaroid, it was bust) with a straight camera. We gave the film to Bob Gruen to develop, he brought back blank film.... said it looked like it had been thru the radar at customs.... well, it stayed around for a bit, then sailed off.......
Q. Did you check to see.......
A. Yeh, yeh, the next day Bob (is it in focus) Gruen rang the Daily News, Times, police to see if any one else reported any thing. Two other people and or groups of/ said they too saw something..... anyway I know what I saw.......
Q. Aren't you afraid people won't believe you.... crazy Lennon/ Maharishi/ etc.
A. That's just one of the many burdens I will have to bear in this day of waterbabies, inflation, generation crap, highly influential, but not untidy....
May Pang who was the friend John Lennon was referring to, relates the story of this sighting in her book "Loving John". Lennon writes "There's UFOs over New York, and I ain't too surprised" in the song "Nobody Told Me". Strange days indeed. 68.160.241.152 22:27, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Lennon's UFO sighting 

message: I support Tysto's edit of the shooting details and the moving of all the specifics out of John's page over to the murderer's page.  SteveHopson 18:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shooting Details