Talk:Jimmy Savile

message: The introduction states that Savile started at Radio 1 in 1986. He started there in 1968. 2A00:23C8:7F88:EE01:8851:263B:EB06:3155 (talk) 00:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup. Not sure if it was a typo, or vandalism, but either way I've corrected it. Thanks. AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 19 March 2024 

message: The article currently reads, “After his death, hundreds of allegations of sexual abuse made against him were investigated”; months back, I started a discussion at Talk:Jimmy Savile sexual abuse scandal#How should we keep this article close to neutral? concerning the use of terms such as "alleged". I felt it’s probably best to drop “alleged” from any article.  Can anyone clarify if any consensus has been reached? 92.17.198.220 (talk) 04:44, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Savile's reputation is in ruins, but the previous consensus is that he was never charged or convicted of any crimes because the major controversy occurred after his death. We can't write history backwards.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:54, 28 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Allegations remain allegations until proven or disproven. That's how the English and Welsh legal system works, or fails to work, depending on your viewpoint. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  “Allegations” 

message: Would it not be appropriate to add some reference to the sex offence allegations to the first sentence of this article? Jimmy Savile is (now) at least as well known for his alleged sex offences as for his media career.
Also worthy of note, is that Google (also possibly other search engines) tends to scrub the first few sentences of a Wikipedia article to prvide a brief description of a search term, which at present does not include any reference to the aforementioned allegations. Notwithstanding the need for proper non-bias (ie. not removing "Sir"; repeated use of the word alleged, etc.) surely adding "... and alleged serial sex-offender" or similar to the first sentence would be a good idea? BobSagetOoosh (talk) 05:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This question comes up a few times a year and should probably be included as an FAQ at the top of the page. Previous discussions (including an RfC) have decided that it does not belong in the first sentence.LM2000 (talk) 05:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:LEAD is what matters here. Wikipedia has no control over how Google displays a Wikipedia article, and they usually show only a very short piece of text. The current wording is the result of many discussions. Savile's media career is what made him notable, and he got the full national treasure treatment during his lifetime. But it all fell to pieces within 18 months of his death. The lead is written to provide this explanation for anyone capable of reading a paragraph of text. Even in the age of the internet, people should be capable of doing this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to introduction? 

message: Should Jimmy Savile still be referred to as Sir? 86.9.164.144 (talk) 19:50, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says: "" But, if you do refer to him as Sir, I don't think he'll thank you for it. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

text: the FaQ says we do. Babysharkboss2 was here!! Dr. Wu is NOT a Doctor! 15:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  SIR?