Talk:John Lennon/Archive 6

message: :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)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:JLENN01.jpg

message: 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)
replies: text: Maybe under "Political activism"? I think that if you can cite (reliably) the instance of the courting by the SWP of Liverpool, and Lennon's reaction, then it would be usable. If you cannot cite it, you cannot include it. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 03:54, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Political Associations

message: 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)
thread_title: Archiving

message: 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)
replies: text: The article clearly meats the B-Class criteria.  As for GA, why don't you nominate it? —Viriditas | Talk 22:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it needs quite a few references, and is over 101,202 bytes. I would go through it, but I'm not going to get into any wars about it. --andreasegde (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Lennon is B-class

message: Cleaned up this section a little bit.  Got thoroughly disgusted doing so, I might add.  Hotcop2 (talk) 00:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I know what you mean - a while ago I was working on this page and re-read the NYTimes articles that ran after the murder to get the details right - I said then that I would never read those again, as it was just as painful 25+ years after the fact as it had been the first time I read them, in 1980.  Tvoz |talk 04:56, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Why don't you change it? Sign in, and you can... --andreasegde (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death 

message: 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)
replies: text: I kind of agree with this, but one would have to ask an expert like Vera, Chuck & Dave, as he was given The George Medal. --andreasegde (talk) 18:05, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Order of the British Empire

message: 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)
thread_title: Early years

message: 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)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: 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)
replies: text: J.L.'s article is a very touchy situation.  McCartney's would be easier to get a GA because he's still alive (I think...) therefore, Paul will be a constant work in progress until that time. This article needs a small team to do the final touch-ups and then it should be locked down. Mister ricochet (talk) 05:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: McCartney's article is already a GA. --andreasegde (talk) 13:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I like your humour :) Ask Tvoz - she's a "Nu Yoiker" as well. My answer was probably a result of me coming from The land where men are men, and so are the women. :)--andreasegde (talk) 17:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

text: It gets worse, believe me. It's also the land where men are men, and sheep are scared..., if you know what I mean. :) --andreasegde (talk) 18:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree of course that this article should be a GA.  But forget about "locked down" Ricochet, if you mean full protection - ain't gonna happen, nor should it.  If you meant something else - well, I'm from the Bronx, so I don't speak your language.  And Andrew, please let's keep the sheep in the meadow....Tvoz |talk 06:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA (again)

message: 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)
thread_title: Back to business, or busy nests

message: 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)
replies: text: Nah, not really, I suppose. I got a bit trigger-happy throwing in "fact" - sorry. (Although something from a chart page would be nice?) --andreasegde (talk) 06:44, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations Needed in Solo Career 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Knock him into GA shape 

message: 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)
replies: text: Don't get dispirited, Hotcop2, the Wiki photo zealots have been on the warpath on two or three articles I've worked on. Don't give up, because yer Fab yer are, and you're much valued. --andreasegde (talk) 00:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Awwww, thanks A. Nobody does anything "for the good of Wiki," just for the power play. so I had the power to remove the best photo of J.L. ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 00:22, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Comee on, Hot, don't be that way. The article's images are going to be under a lot of scrutiny after Six's nonsense a few months ago. Once the image makes it through Commons, you are good to go. If you are encountering some difficulty, go to the editor who initially blocked Six and ask him for his personal assistance. He kinda struck me as someone one keen to help. the image is good enough to shoot for. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Arcayne and Andreasegde - and that photo is worth fighting for. Tvoz |talk 06:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And if you need the help, it's okay to ask for it. We all want the article to be better, bubelah. ;) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 07:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am working with HotCop2 to get this done, will update as events unfold.  R. Baley (talk) 23:43, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Bubelah is a colloquialism from Yiddish referring to someone endearing. What, were you expecting some synonym for convex sheep lovery? :) - Arcayne (cast a spell) 10:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: How dare you insinuate that this bulvon was thinking about sheep and their wedding tackle? (Bah-hah-ahhh... :) --The wolf in sheep's clothing (talk) 11:59, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: (I didn't upload the "soon to be deleted" image. I just added the silly caption...) --andreasegde (talk) 11:56, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

text: That sounds like a consensus. Anyone else want to get in on this? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 10:05, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed the Lennon NYC T-shirt photo 

message: 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)
thread_title: Political activism and the deportation battle

message: 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)
replies: text: Now that looks much better.  The last version looked too choppy (sentence frags etc.) This will do. Mister ricochet (talk) 03:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thank you, Mister ricochet. The rest of the article has stuff like the drugs section had, but we can work on those. --andreasegde (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Drug use

message: 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)
replies: text: I think I fixed it, because it was my fault (or maybe not? :) --andreasegde (talk) 21:53, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1980 Starting over 

message: 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)
replies: text: You've got in one Hotcop! If we move House-husband up to the 1975s, then anyone reading it will not know who Yoko really is, as she comes later. I could move the whole Personal life section up, with Cynthia, Yoko and House-husband... but this is the problem - how do we make the sections seem ordered? --andreasegde (talk) 21:50, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yoko appears at the beginning of the article and is featrured throughout.  She's also throughout the "solo career," all of which come before "perosnal life" -- I'm assuming that enough people know who Yoko is to wait to the end to read about her.  But even Ono's section doesn't really talk about how they met (and there's plenty of info on that bit that goes far beyond hammering an imaginary nail).  So once we get a good order, we can work on the actual sections.  (this paragraph is about as coherent as the article LOL) Hotcop2 (talk) 15:31, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Yoko appears at the beginning of the article and is featured throughout". That is the problem - it's too confusing. The second one is this: "I'm assuming that enough people know who Yoko is". The problem for younger people is that they don't. It has to be clear, and easy to read. --andreasegde (talk) 01:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Househusband 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Lifestyle 

message: 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)
thread_title: The order of sections

message: 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)
thread_title:  Let's go for the GA 

message: 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)
replies: text: Update, a related AN/I has also been filed. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 09:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Nah. He'll be back, as surely as night follows day. Raymond Arritt (talk) 20:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not if we ban the IP range. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 00:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: De-archiving

message: 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)
replies: text: I will wait until there is some agreement. It would be good to ask seasoned editors what their opinion is. :) --andreasegde (talk) 20:02, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Andreasegde's point 

message: 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)
replies: text: Will do. BTW, isn't the Popemobile the ugliest car you have ever seen? It looks like a fishtank on wheels. --andreasegde (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Placeholder Image

message: 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)
thread_title: Order

message: 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)
thread_title: Not Wiki

message: there, nothing else to say ;-) Hotcop2 (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is that true? I hope not. There are more references for May Pang to find, because her contribution has been overlooked (until now...) Stay on board, Hotcop, because two extra hands are better than two of my fingers typing, and articles always needs some advice from fresh eyes... :) --andreasegde (talk) 20:04, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Looking Good 

message: 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)
thread_title: Too Long

message: 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)
replies: text: Should we shorten it?  When you say new article, do you mean standalone or within the Lennon page? Hotcop2 (talk) 23:18, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should make a new article. It's too long here, and it could be longer as its own article with comments from various people about where they were, etc,. I wouldn't want to cut it back here, as everything that's in it is verifiable and (I don't want to say this..) interesting. It doesn't mean cutting all of it out - just cutting it down after creating a new page. (Annie's comment could also join it, which I took out and moved to her page.) What does one think? --andreasegde (talk) 05:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Death

message: 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)
replies: text: A damn shame that we cannot use the one of her and Lennon in the limo. A shot of her now seems...off-point. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, the Limo photo is a brilliant, but I'm grateful to Hotcop2 for the photo. BTW, why does May get such bad press, or is almost ignored? I have heard her comments on YouTube, and I have no idea why. Would it destroy the ideal? (I know this is POV, but I don't care...) --andreasegde (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photo

message: *1970-1980: Solo Career 
*Political activism 
*Yoko Ono
These need work, but especially the first two. --andreasegde (talk) 17:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: To do

message: 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)
replies: text: I think folk are just taking a break. All the sockpuppetry tends to wear people out. Give it a bit of time. Folk will come back. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:51, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I thank you, Oh, lone voice in the wilderness. :)) I was just being humorous, BTW. I have now realised this article needs more references than I thought. Bugger... Lennon will get a GA or I will my eat my socks. Have fun. :) --andreasegde (talk) 19:15, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Shh, don't say 'socks' too loud. It might encourage them to visit... lol! - Arcayne (cast a spell) 05:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL! I walked into that one! I personally admit that I would eat socks, but I have an aversion to puppets (because it's only a hand inside a sock). Good grief, I have to read what I write in the future... :) --andreasegde (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Talking to myself

message: 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)
replies: text: You cannot edit here, SixString1965, either as you or some sock. Period. You are a liability at this point. be a man, and walk away until you can apply for reinstatement. You aren't a part of this community or this discussion. You cannot be, as you squandered that chance, at least for now. We will deal with the vandals on our own, and we will muddle through somehow without you and get the article to GA or even FA. You aren't part of the solution; you are part of the problem. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 04:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peace