Talk:Pete Burns/Archive 1

Botched lip procedure

I don't know why this information was removed as it is relevant to the article and only recently publicly revealed by Burns (on Celebrity Big Brother UK). Pete Burns is well known for his cosmetic alterations which is the reason this information is relevant. --sebiv 11:11, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I second that the lip surgery is relevant to this article. How can anyone look at Pete Burns and NOT want to know about his cosmetic alterations? --highgater 16:18, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Chart performance

"Although the single was only available through the Pet Shop Boys own website, it did reach #75 in the UK singles chart"

I'm sure this cannot be right - I thought only shop sales of singles counted towards chart placings, not sales through websites (disregarding downloads, which were not a factor at the time this single was out).....? ChrisTheDude 13:48, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Charts used to be based on record sales and radio play (which is how some songs managed to enter the chart prior to actual release), so I'm presuming this one picked up some air time.

Not in the UK. In the UK chart positions are based solely on record sales (and download sales now, but they weren't at the time Jack And Jill Party was released). Airplay has never counted to chart positions. So I don't think that it can have been solely available through their website.

I've removed the reference...... ChrisTheDude 13:21, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually some UK charts are based on both sales and radio airplay. It used to be called the Pepsi chart, I am not sure who sponsor it now. Astrotrain 13:28, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the chart that they're talking about, the one that it reached #75 on, is the official singles chart, the one with no airplay. I don't know if it did anything on Hit40 UK (which is what I think the Pepsi chart is chart now) but I'm not sure if anyone actually keeps track of it. It's like CD:UK's MiTracks chart, it counts for nothing really.

some interesting stuff

I dont see why they took all that stuff out, his moms name was eva, a jewish aristocrat she died of cancer and she was a member of the russian secret police with a fake passport, and she was forced into hiding, I dunno her family name, she fled the nazis with a scotsman in the army francis burns. Pete spoke german till age five and the local kids would tease him and shout heil hitler. They recon his sexuality is debatable.

(Debatable? Have you seen him lately?)

http://www.biogs.com/bigbrother/burns.html

http://www.nndb.com/people/022/000110689/

i notice that at the end of the article it says pete unfortunately died of aids in 1992!! must be his ghost in the house then??!! spooky!!

What the hell??

What is with all the editing and vandlism activity on this article in the last few weeks?? Exploding Boy 22:18, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

He's appearing in Celebrity Big Brother in the UK, which has cast him back into the public spotlight.--NaLaochra 01:59, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Private Life info

I changed the dates listed for Pete's marriage to Lynne Burns. They were actually married between 1980 and 2004, substantiated by a famous quote where Pete said the happiest day of his life was August 8, 1980, when he married Lynne. I also am not sure that Pete ever "denied" being homosexual. He had a Clinton-esque way of dancing around that issue whenever he talked about it, and I think he only said he wasn't gay--which, if he's bisexual, then he really isn't gay. He was married to Lynne, but many of his lyrical references were specifically about other men, like "Big Daddy of the Rhythm" on the album Youthquake. It was also readily accepted for many years that Pete and Steve Coy, the drummer from DOA, were lovers, and in fact Pete, Steve and Lynne lived together as a trio. This was remarked upon by several journalists, although I can't produce the articles for verification purposes here. I simply recall reading them.

VertigoXpress 16:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Bischonen?

Should there be a link on this page to the Bischonen article?--80.47.95.10 17:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Why exactly? Since when has Pete Burns been a cartoon character???!!! 212.139.171.139 16:15, 16 February 2007 (UTC) Though I can kinda see what you mean. He is like a cartoon character- Dead Or Alive comic books are available in Japan... he's very popular over there; they like stuff like that. All my Japanese friends love visual kei bands.

Donna Coulling

I can't find any references on line to Donna Coulling, except in reference to this show, so I've rephrased the part about her. To be a "celebrity PA", I'd say you have to be a celebrity! Rojomoke 11:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Grammar mistake, 's

Note that 's should still be used in singular-possessive sentences, even tho his last name ends with 's'. This discussion occured at the Britney Spears talk page a while back and that also points to the apostrophe article as well... so Burns's should not be changed to Burns'. - eo (talk) 14:36, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

The discussion on the Britney Spears page was a sequence of three information comments and should not be held as a defining example of "the right way to do things'. The meat of the issue is described at length at the second reference: the Apostrophe article.
WP MOS makes no ruling but refers to the Apostrophe article. The general thrust of the Apostrophe article is that there is no firm consensus for one or the other.
In that case, the only rules we should submit to here are firstly that edit warring is not allowed and secondly that in every case where there is no clear mandate for a change of an issue such as this one, no change is made to the existing entry. It's not appropriate to insist on something that is not mandated one way or the other.

Eviction

A perfectly factual and "well-sourced" episode, even with a fulsome quote. Except that the source is the Daily Mirror. Any suggestions? Martinevans123 (talk) 21:55, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

I was tempted to remove all this info back when it was added, due to the non-BLP-compliant nature of the source. I think I did have a brief look for alternative sources, but I don't think that The Guardian or The Times are likely to cover such a 'story'... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:08, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

How about Estate Agent Today or even Buy-to-Let Weekly?? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:19, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Going down the property mag route, this story is covered by propertyreporter.co.uk and Today's Landlord, but whether these sources can be considered reliable, I'm not sure. The latter one looks like it may be OK, as it does contain some specifics that are not in the Mirror article (e.g. stating that Burns' details are "currently registered with trustee Mark Sands of UK wide advisory group Baker Tilly"), suggesting at least some independent sourcing...? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:42, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Estate Agents = reliable? Do they describe Burns' flat as "a charming bijoux residence ideally located for all local amenities"... ? Martinevans123 (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Those particular property-market sources aren't aimed at selling property, so estate agent tendencies toward papering over cracks shouldn't be a concern. (Actually I did once hear Burns' flat described as "bijou", by the voiceover during his appearance on Celebrity Wife Swap...) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 23:16, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

It's hard to imagine a more bizarre television programme. Sorry I missed that one. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:21, 21 December 2015 (UTC) (... as if Pete would ever want to "paper over the cracks"?)

Vandalism in the death column

Someone has vandalised the death column of his page, to say he's alive. Will rectify this, now. Martinwylie1990 (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2016

95.88.129.120 (talk) 18:12, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

He just passed away

Already covered 5 albert square (talk) 18:14, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Mystery Girls

Sad to hear of Pete's passing. Regarding the Mystery Girls; is this band the same Mystery Girls that Robert Farrar was in? -- The Anome (talk) 18:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Drag queen?

Is he a drag queen? It's a legitimate question. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.217.196 (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

He wasn't a drag queen. If you wish to put information in the article, you need to find reliable sources that back it up. A drag queen plays a role, whereas Burns looked the way he did at all times, and though he feminised his facial appearance, he wasn't acting a female role. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

related question: was he gay? cause he's listed as LGBT in categories, but article doesnt address this. his crossdressing or whatever may not mean he self identified as lgbt, just saying. I just dont want incorrect info, even in categorization. (Mercurywoodrose)50.193.19.66 (talk) 20:36, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

never mind. i see he married a "michael" presumbably a male. wish it was more explicit, but thats good enough.50.193.19.66 (talk) 20:38, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

It's not good enough, really. Marital status can't generally be taken as an indication of sexual. Any Categories used in an article would normally need to be supported by material in the article. Did Burns ever speak publicly about his sexuality? It's hardly controversial to claim he was "LGBT", but that's the general convention for BLP articles. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:52, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

He does say something in his autobiography about his sexuality/gender - something along the lines of "I'm just me" - but I need to find where it is... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:55, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Eulogies

Per WP:NOTMEMORIAL, this entry should please not be allowed to become a list of condolences. It is actually more dignified and respectful to record this artist's life and work dispassionately, than to record in detail what every celeb said about him when he died. --John (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

I think "every celeb" is a little ambitious, if not rather unlikely. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

See hyperbole. Hoof Hearted (talk) 19:06, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOTMEMORIAL says "Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet [Wikipedia's notability requirements]"; it says nothing about statements made by public figures following a notable person's death. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:05, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

See a combination of webcomic and blog. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:27, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

We are not a bureaucracy and a certain amount of intelligence and writing ability is required. I would suggest that restoring "You don’t get more brilliant than that" is contrary to the spirit of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. It certainly makes for an icky article. We are supposed to be writing an encyclopedia article, not a condolences book for minor celebs. --John (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOTMEMORIAL doesn't refer to this situation, so writing to conform to its spirit seems rather odd. Your comment that this should not be a "condolences book for minor celebs" concerns me, as there have only ever been two quotes added, which would make a rather a thin condolences book, and thus your comment suggests that at least part of your motivation for removing the eulogies is that you don't think Burns, as a "minor celeb", to be worthy of them. I added the statements from Boy George and George Galloway (out of several possible candidates that were quoted in the obituaries) because they are well-known people with a pertinence to this article; Boy George occupies a similar cultural position to Burns, while Galloway took part in the CBB series with Burns but offers a serious voice and opinion. Both the comments say something about Burns in a memorable way, adding to an understanding of how Burns is regarded. I thought about whether including "You don’t get more brilliant than that" was necessary, but thought that without it, the quote sounds like something that a journalist would have written, rather than a genuine mark of respect. I would be interested to hear what other editors thought. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 23:33, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Have to agree with Cloudy here, a couple of well chosen quotes won't hurt. The Boy George quote is useful. The Galloway one, while it may be "icky" to some, adds something I feel, and would be surely be worse when turned into prose (something like): George Galloway, who had appeared with him on Celebrity Big Brother, said Burns was an unbeatable hybrid of Oscar Wilde and Dorothy Parker. --Hillbillyholiday ^talk 23:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Sourcing

In spite of the recent news of the subject's death, this article remains subject to WP:BLPSOURCES and cannot therefore carry any material sourced purely to tabloid journalism. I've removed the Mail and Mirror material on this basis. --John (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, but some of the information you removed was hardly controversial - that he appeared on a TV show, for instance. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Nor was it interesting or crucial to the article. In cases of doubt regarding BLP we err on the side of removing material that is poorly sourced. The policy's at WP:BLP and is interesting not to say essential reading for those planning to be involved in editing articles on living (or recently-dead) subjects. --John (talk) 19:11, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

It is very sad that certain newspapers are facing censorship by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.128.9 (talk) 20:34, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

It is less a matter of censorship than one of reliability, but there you go. --John (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Pathetic that an anonymous bloke called "John" can censor the Daily Mail and the Mirror on Wikipedia. The Mail and Mirror are two of the most widely-read English language newspapers in the world. And both are subject to strict regulatory rules on accuracy, honesty and attribution in reporting. Whereas "John" of Wikipedia, well, who exactly is he?! Furthermore, there is a dead link (to insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk) which has been dead for over a year. Perhaps "John" can deal with that? Clumsyclyve (talk) 14:38, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

"John" happens to be an administrator here. There is no censorship on Wikipedia. We do need reliable sources, and tabloid journalism should be used with a great deal of caution. Karst (talk) 14:50, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Neither you nor "John" have explained why the airbrushed articles are "unreliable". Please demonstrate how, where and why the information those articles contain is wrong. Besides, what makes "John" (or you) any sort of arbiter of accuracy, compared to DMG Media, which employs thousands of journalists, editors and lawyers double-checking every word in every copy? To delete Daily Mail articles solely for being a tabloid comes across as unabashed snobbery. Pete Burns was/is very much the focus of tabloid newspapers, and not broadsheets. Ergo, that's where the best insights on him will be found. Your haughty snootiness concerning sources is damaging the quality of Wikipedia; which is pretty poor at the best of times. Clumsyclyve (talk) 15:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

The Sun is the biggest-selling newspaper in the UK. But that says a great deal more about the general ignorance of the British public than it does about the quality and reliability of that newspaper's content. This isn't "snobbery", it's just fact. If you are that concerned, forget about accusations of "haughty snootiness", and raise the matter at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Well, let's look at the Mirror piece that is being quoted in relation to his ex wife. It begins with "She was married to the singer for 25 years but little is known about Pete Burns ' ex-wife". Which is nonsense as she is featured quite prominently in his biography Freak Unique. The rest of it is just puffery taken from another article in the Sun. It does not make for a very reliable source. This is the problem. Karst (talk) 15:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

It is your opinion, neverthelsss a highly inappropriate one to inject here, that The Sun's popularity is in any way communicating about what you call "the general ignorance of the British public"; pejorative and nothing to do with "snobbery", nothing to do with fact.
The reason for the Sun's popularity is that a lot of people do not want news as much as they want to be entertained. That they might interpret some of what they read as fact is as much a feature of the Internet as much as it is of The Sun. Recent and ongoing statements and claims relating to the recent US election should go a long way to suggest that, if a person is able to make any kind of claim about anything at all, and that claim is interpreted by any third party as fact, it proves that all Internet users are ignorant. All we can do here is ensure that information has sources are unimpeachable or is not included.

Civil partnership

"Relationships" section said he had civil partnership with Michael Simpson in 2006, then goes on to refer to their "marriage" and potential "divorce". CP is not marriage and gay marriage was not possible in UK in 2006. I reworded accordingly.Newburyjohn (talk) 15:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

This has been 'un-corrected' by some-one. Gay marriage was illegal in the UK until 2013. This clear error needs correcting, and the vandal dealing with. Ian H 24/10/16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.128.9 (talk) 20:32, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Why has his marriaged to Lynne Corlett been marked as needing citation, when the England and Wales Civil Marriage index is cited already? Sah10406 (talk) 14:02, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism

All the links here go to some random footballer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.70.117.123 (talk) 01:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Vandalism has been fixed. Hoof Hearted (talk) 14:50, 1 November 2016 (UTC)