Talk:Cliff Richard/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Where was mother born?

Please could you tell me where Sir Cliff's mother was born. My father in law insists that the lady was an Indian lady. I have seen a photo of his mother and I think that she was probably British. Please can you tell me the answer? My e-mail is Ba2836913@aol.com 22:25, 15 March 2004 195.93.32.10

Only Sir Cliff knows where, exactly, his mother was born but from my knowledge of the anglo-indian community, I guess that she was born in India. No, she was NOT an "Indian" lady. She was, quite clearly, an anglo-indian lady. There is a difference. The anglo-indians came about as a result of the British occupation in India. To start with, the British tea planters (merchants) from the East India Company were encouraged to marry Indian women. These marriages produced the anglo-indian children who would, later, form the anglo-indian community. A community which spread far and wide after the Independence of India in 1947. There are, currently, large anglo-indian communities in Australia, Canada and the UK.

Just to add to this, as far as I know being Indian and being Anglo-Indian are not exclusive. If Sir Cliff's mother was born in India, then she was Indian, regardless of her ancestry. Also, there is a reference to the British 'occupation' in India, but it was a colonisation rather than an occupation. DavidFarmbrough 07:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Being Anglo-Indian is very different to being Indian. After 1947 the Anglo-Indians were not welcome in India (they could not get jobs). Furthermore, Cliff Richard, himself, was born in Lucknow, India, in 1940. Do you think that he refers to himself as Indian? Just a thought.

Most of the Anglo-Indians, living in India in the 1940s had British passports. They were, therefore, British. I think this is what Cliff Richard considers himself to be, despite the fact that he was born in India.

Yes, if Cliff Richard's mother was Anglo-Indian (as was his father, I believe), then she was Indian (just as French Canadians are still Canadians, and Greek Cypriots Cypriot etc.). Since Cliff was born and raised in India, I would suggest that his nationality be changed to 'Indian' (or 'British-based Indian'). I will change it now. If this is reverted then I think we should conduct a poll. Cypriot stud 16:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

I think someone should ask Sir Cliff what he thinks of all this. From what I remember, he has always denied being an Indian and has always referred to himself as British. Why would he call himself a 'British-based Indian' when it is not true? He does not have an Indian culture. (His culture is either Anglo-Indian or British.) User:Desert Flower 20:45, 12 January 2007

Well seeing as we cannot ask Sir Cliff ourselves, we need to go by Wikipedia rules. Since he is actually an Indian-born Anglo-Indian (rather than an overseas Anglo-Indian) and lived in India for some considerable time, I feel this is relevant to his nationality tag. He is not English, so this cannot be tagged to his nationality, but due to the start of his fame and current residence in Britain, British is also a contender. 'Anglo-Indian' is not a citizenship, but an ethnic group; a sub-group of Indian. This can be compared to Céline Dion, who must be referred to as Canadian, not French Canadian, or Anna Vissi, who must be referred to as Cypriot, not Greek Cypriot etc. The same applies to Sir Cliff. I would also agree that 'British-Indian' is acceptable here for his nationality tag, to which I will edit the article now. Cypriot stud 17:06, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

According to Steve Turner (Cliff Richard: The Biography; 4th ed. Lion Hudson Oxford 2005) there’s no evidence that any of Cliff Richard's ancestor's who lived in India were of Indian ethnicity. Tracing back his ancestors to the early 1800s the only evidence for non-British ancestors is Cliff’s great-grandmother Marie-Beatrice Smith (b. 1869) who had a Spanish mother. I’d clearly argue against a tag for “Indian” ethnicity and just leave it with “British”. Linguini

Cliff Richard is actually full Indian (or 15/16ths Indian to be precise if you want to include his distant Spanish heritage); his parents were Anglo-Indians, thus arguably Indians. I would think that just 'British' is appropriate if he was born in Britain, but since he was born (and raised for several years) in India, and is an Anglo-Indian, I feel that it should be mentioned. Cypriot stud 19:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Cliff Richard is not fully Indian, and I cannot believe you seriously suggest so. His parents lived in India, this does not mean he is Indian! The fact they left when India got independance suggests that they were British people living out there while it was part of the Empire, like many did. Many British people were born in the then Colonies, but this does not mean they were that nationality. Moreover, Linguini has sourced a book that says he has no Indian heritage, where is your source? --Berks105 20:15, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

He is full Anglo-Indian. Check all over the Internet and even Wikipedia. He is known as a British Asian/Eurasian (due to the mixed heritage of Anglo-Indians), although Anglo-Indians equally, although they had British traits and customs (Christianity etc.), they fall under a sub-category of Indians (just as Indians Parsis, Punjabis, Gujuratis etc.). They are typically "a different kind of Indian" rather than "a different kind of British". Anyway, it doesn't matter now because I have proposed a new Wikilaw regarding nationality tags which would mean that, either way, Cliff remains 'British'. Cypriot stud 20:58, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

It appears his ancestry is English with Portugese/Spanish via his maternal grandmother: http://books.google.co.uk/books?ei=3TGVS5b8PIyOjAfu-qCBCw&ct=result&id=He0S6tFOGPUC&dq=cliff+richard+biography&q=india#v=snippet&q=india&f=false but no clear evidence of Indian ancestry other than through Anglo-Indian settlement during the Raj. It is possible that there is Indian ancestry through the earlier Portugese/Spanish-Indian settlement ancestry, but no evidence for it. I would argue that he had an Anglo-Indian background, as India was part of the British Empire, and was (and still is) British rather than English. However, Anglo-Indian has connotations of Anglicised Indians & mixed Indian-English parentage, unlike Anglo-Irish which tends to describe people of English origin living in Ireland. Would it be simpler to say he is British, born in India? Mish (talk) 17:46, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Copyright violation?

This article reads like the liner notes from a boxed set retrospective, or something similar. Can the author please verify his work as authentic and original to Wikipedia? Jumbo 11:56, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I agree. I was drawn here by a link and discovered a mess. I attempted to introduce sub-heads and clean it up but there is virtually nothing about him as an individual human being. It requires the attention of someone who is both a fan and a writer to create a decent biography. (I am not that big of a fan.) MPLX/MH 23:24, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree... phrases like "At long last he had some extended success in the United States" have either been lifted or written by a fan who needs to make it a bit more objective.Lanzarotemaps (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Britons surprised?

"Britons are always surprised that he is a virtual unknown in America, because during the height of his poularity there he had enjoyed Elvis like fame."

I've removed this because no we're not surprised that he isn't famous in America, more often we're glad. And leaving point of view aside this isn't very encyclopedic and is utterly frivolous. 17:54, 29 April 2005 217.42.25.38

The above comment is ignorance and shows a mere POV of a cliff hater, not someone who is interested in making an article better. 64.12.116.7 15:15, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Isn't "mere POV of a cliff hater" a 'mere' point of view ?? I agree ... as a Briton who does not (by any means) class themselves a fan of cliff (I quite like his early stuff) or a "cliff hater" (Saviours Day === purleeze!) I am NOT always surprised because I couldn't car less if he is (or is not) a virtual unknown in America. It could have been worded better.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanzarotemaps (talk • contribs) 23:38, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Without a source, this is not appropriate - how do we know most Britons are surprised about this? Are most Britons surprised, or do most Britons not have an opinion, (or maybe they appreciate that the USA had Elvis, who never visited the UK, so we had Cliff instead), or does this actually mean that most fans are surprised? Mish (talk) 11:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Loved in Barbados too

It should also be noted that he spends most of his time in the tiny Caribbean luxury island of Barbados and is quite loved and appreciated there too. 21:57, 25 July 2005 216.110.107.3

I've added that he spends time there; need a reference for the 'being loved' part. Wasted Time R 00:53, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Portrayal of UK fame misleading

I don't understand how he is supposed to be one of the UK's most popular artists. I think this is misleading. He certainly isn't. People often wonder who buys his records when he manages to get another number 1. I gather it is a generation of older people or fans of Christian music that he is popular with. His career has been very long which explains how he may seem to have achieved a lot more but he's not been popular consistantly throughout. I have no problem with the guy but this piece needs to be tweaked ever so slightly. He is not "enormously famous" in the UK, if he is recognised it is no great thing, it's for being a has-been who pops up every now and then. 12:18, 3 October 2005 82.41.85.24

I do not agree in any way with this assertion. Cliff Richard has been a famous start in the UK since the laste 1950s. However, with the changing nature of so called 'stardom', his along with many others has changed. Cliff is most likely viewed as a high profile 'celebrity' now as opposed to a 'pop star' I am sure that he is comfortable with that. For God's sake the guy is in his 60s. He had been famous since 1958. I am not a particular fan of Cliff's but would argue that he is most definetly famous! 23:31, 27 October 2006 82.37.196.46

But that wasn't what the poster above said...he never said that Cliff Richard "wasn't famous" he said that he "certainly isn't one of the UK's most popular artists". And I would suggest that, certainly as of today, that is very true. If Cliff Richard was one of the UK's most popular artists he would be selling sufficient albums to get into the album sales charts in at least the top 20 fairly regularly, and I don't believe he has done this for some considerable time. He would also be targeted by TV show producers due to his popularity, and I don't recall seeing him on UK TV for literally years. In the 1970s he probably was one of the most popular artists in the UK, but not today. SM 19/12/08 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.198.33.252 (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

That is only your own point of view. Here we go by facts. The fact he has had a long time in the charts actually show he is popular. Who wonders who buys his records? Certinaly not the millions who do. His tours across the UK still sell-out. When he brings out records they still make the charts and most do very well. The introduction has proof he has had OVER 150 records chart since the mid-1950s to the present day. Very few singers in the UK have the level of fame and success Cliff Richard has, this is proven by facts, not my obersvations, not vague estimations, but solid facts from the music industry. You might be misguided and think he isn't but the facts are 100% there to show he is. Please look at all the facts first. To then say he isn't "enormously famous" after doing so would just be ignorace. 66.66.161.1 18:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Could people please stop adding the words "aged 30 and up", after "one of the UK's most popular singers", even if this were true, it makes no diffrence. To be a popular singer it is based on the whole population and there is no need for that line to be added. When a song is a hit and sells the most, no one mentioned ages groups, i.e no other article would say "it was the biggest record of 2006, amoung those aged between 10 and 25, it wasn't bought by many people in other age groups". Cliff is one of the UK's most popular singers, based on chart facts, record sales and concert tickets and that's that. 66.66.161.1 18:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Does the phrase need to be "enormously famous" - doesn't "famous" cover it? Lanzarotemaps (talk) 23:40, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Trying to add balance → copyright violation?

As a long time observer of Cliff's career I have tried to make the profile more balanced. However I feel the negative spin to these comments in this discussion box show an emnity towards him that is not really justified. 22:14, 17 October 2005 86.130.211.157 a/k/a Marvin Khan 23:08, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately your contribution looked very much like it was copied from another source, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia, and thus it has been removed twice. Even if it wasn't copied, it still was not satisfactory, as it was not integrated into the rest of the article, but instead stood as a parallel alternative to much of the article. Furthermore it lacked "wikification", meaning links to other articles and adherence to Wikipedia style conventions. Wasted Time R 23:54, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

However, I have now incorporated many of the points this text made, with rephrased wording, into the flow of the article. Wasted Time R 02:33, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Cliff & The Beatles

I do not think it likely that Cliff advised the Beatles at the start of their recording career - their approaches to music were too opposed. MK. 22:14, 17 October 2005 86.130.211.157

You are right on this. The Hunter Davies Beatles biography states that the Beatles generally disliked Cliff Richard's music and tried to everything different from him, in terms of looks, music, and roles (no one lead singer, for example). I've removed the assertions. Wasted Time R 01:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

That's funny, as The Beatles have nothing but praise for Cliff in The Beatles anthology interviews!

I don't recall Cliff being mentioned during Anthology, apart from George saying he'd seen Cliff Richard as second on the bill which made them insist on having a no 1 record before they toured. Apepper 18:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The Beatles' Cry For A Shadow was a Shadows-inspired instrumental and Paul McCartney wrote Here, There, And Everywhere for The Shadows originally. They have said they disliked Norrie Paramor's strings and asked George Martin not to use this approach to his orchestrations, so it could be that they liked early period (Rock 'N'Roll) Cliff & The Shadows but the not mid-period pop. DavidFarmbrough 07:27, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a reference for Paul writing Here, There and Everywhere for the Shadows? It was written when they'd more or less stopped writing for other people, so it's a little surprising. Apepper 18:12, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Sectioning

The existing sections broke his career out by recording, film/tv, personal life, etc., except that the text was really more chronological with the different career aspects all mixed together. Thus, I've changed the section names to be on a more chronological basis. Wasted Time R 00:12, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Nickname

Should we mention that he often used to be referred to as "the peter pan of pop"? -- Beardo 06:25, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Sexuality

Unsourced gossip posted to this section by Hayday 15:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC) deleted from talk page per WP:LIVING. KleenupKrew 03:00, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem here is that you refer to a 'well-known fact' but don't give any source for this. This is what is known as a 'rumour'. DavidFarmbrough 07:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Please can someone prove that Sir Cliff "isn't" a homosexual? (perhaps his long-term partner and boyfriend could add some words in his defence?) Hayday 21:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

What does it matter how Sir Cliff gets through the night? 1) It's 2006, 2) We are all grown-ups (including his partner(s) (if any) which is more than we can say about some 'celebrities'), 3) He has never put his head above the parapet to condemn anybody else's sexuality, and so can therefore never be accused of being a hypocrite. Therefore if he wants to keep his cards close to his chest, that's fine. MaxieT 10:48, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

There have been many rumours about Cliff's sexuality, not to mention an urban myth about him having a colostomy. I believe he has dismissed both these stories, but has indicated that they don't particularly bother him. I think their persistence makes them relevant to the overall story, even if they aren't true (in the same way that conspiracy theories about JFK are relevant, even if crazy or unproveable). As long as they aren't stated to be fact, why not include them. And that's without considering the lyrics of 'Goodbye Sam, Hello Samantha'. Widmerpool (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Is it my imagination, or wasnt there material and evidence on this some months back, that is being consistently deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.201.105.159 (talk) 11:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

HONESTLY WHO CARES IF CLIFF IS GAY OR STRAIGHT>>>>FOR HEAVEN'S SAKE!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.237.56.123 (talk) 21:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I certainly don't. But I am interested in reading about his life in an honest and transparent way. I don't like censorship that pretends to be aiming at privacy when really its all about prudery. Let's have the facts, and let them speak for themselves. Contaldo80 (talk) 08:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Whilst not particularly caring whether he's gay, straight, or bisexual I *am* interested in how (if he isn't straight heterosexual) he's managed to keep it covered up and avoided the News Of The World type exposure for (at least) 50 years! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lanzarotemaps (talk • contribs) 23:44, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Given he does not self-identify as gay, I can see no justification for speculating on his sexual orientation here (it is an issue we need to adhere to NPOV, especially as this is a BLP). However, such speculation has been around for four decades at least, so it would be bizarre if the speculation itself were not referred to, and his irritation with such speculation. The current coverage seems to get this about right. Mish (talk) 10:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Best-known singer?

The first sentence in this article makes the rather bold, unreferenced statement that Cliff is the UK's best-known singer. There needs to be a reference for such a grand statement... otherwise it should be replaced with something less absolute (for example, "among the UK's best-known singers"). EuroSong ^talk 22:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah okay, it's already been reverted :P EuroSong ^talk 22:52, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

References

I've added the unreferenced tag as this article has a lot of statements with no references or links to back them up - in fact, there's no proper references listed anywhere, just some external links for some of the claims. Wibbble 22:22, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

This is still quite true 3 years after the original comment. There is far too much here that needs citations, especially given the length of the article and the number of claims made herein. 76.168.65.230 (talk) 14:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

The Young Ones

No mention of his charity recording of "Living Doll" with The_Young_Ones_(TV_series)? It was for comic relief in the eighties, but I don't know enough to add to the page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 62.56.55.105 (talk • contribs) 18:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

Cliff and the f-word

I removed the paragraph mentioning Cliff's image after the use of the f-word. As is apparent from TV-footage on Youtube, Cliff Richard was prompted several times by Gordon Ramsay to say "fuck" and was reluctant to say it but eventually gave in. Linguini 00:28, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure that's relevant: he did still say it, as you've just confirmed. I'm also not sure that your depiction of it actually matches what can be seen, for example here: [1] I'm going to revert the removal since I don't think this is sufficient reason to remove this part of the article. Wibbble 00:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The paragraph doubts Cliff Richard's "entirely clean cut" image because of him saying "fuck off". This is a misinterpretation of the actual situation in which Ramsay prompted Richard to say "fuck off" to him and Richard, jokingly, gave in. In this context, however, the utterance loses its relevance for Cliff Richard's image. What he shows here is perhaps the willingness to go along with a type of humour that he wouldn't normally use. Linguini 00:57, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

What he shows here is perhaps the willingness to go along with a type of humour that he wouldn't normally use. which is exactly the point, I think, since that is what goes against his 'clean-cut image'. Now, it might be better placed in the 'trivia' section (along with a mention of his vineyard), but I do think that it merits inclusion. A Google search shows that this was widely reported in the media at the time. Wibbble 01:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

It's interesting what the media made of this episode. The Independent writes, Cliff Richard had been "shouting the phrase 'fuck off!'" The video shows that he's not shouting at all. The Independent reports that Ramsay had said 'Cliff, it's your fucking wine'." Again wrong, the line doesn't even occur in the dialogue. The Independent apparently quotes Gordon Ramsay: "He obviously didn't like to hear that, so he turned around and told me, to my face, that I could 'fuck off'." A completely wrong impression is created.

What we can see in the video is Cliff Richard being tricked into slagging his own wine off ('it tastes harsh'). As it is revealed to him he's guffawing and laughing off the embarrassment. A few more laughing and joking remarks between the two men. Then Gordon Ramsay leans over to him and says into his ear: "You can tell me to fuck off now", after which Cliff Richard says jokingly "Young man you can fuck off now". Again guffaws and laughter from both men.

In terms of the interaction between them, "You can tell me to fuck off now " is Gordon Ramsay apparently offering solidarity to Cliff Richard, who's just been made to look a bit foolish. Cliff Richard accepts the offer and says exactly what he's told to say, this way creating solidarity with his host and allowing them both to laugh it off and to resolve the tension. As often is the case in everyday interaction, humour is used to resolve a tense and embarrassing situation. In this case you get the impression that it's not exactly Cliff Richard's kind of humour and that he's not entirely comfortable with it, but he plays along with it.

Against his squeaky-clean image? Now way. I would have found it much more amusing if he had really sworn at Gordon Ramsay, leaving him baffled and speechless. Linguini 09:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I think, once again, you've just made my point for me. The fact that the event was mis-reported doesn't change the fact that it was reported, and is therefor both notable and verified. I'm going to add this back into the article as a simple revert, and I'll move it to the 'trivia' section later on. You might not like how it has been presented, but wikipedia isn't a place for your personal POV. Wibbble 12:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

You've removed exactly the nonsense which bugged me the first time I read it. It's fine now, absolutely no problem. Linguini 02:43, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Editing the article rather than removing content which does not agree with your POV might have been preferable, then. Wibbble 12:52, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not "POV" when the article contains rumours from the tabloids which are clearly misreported - is it? Perhaps we should be a bit more careful what we accept as useful information to begin with. Linguini 16:37, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

The original phrasing was talking about his reputation and public image, which is pretty much defined by newspaper reporting accurate or not. Wibbble 17:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sure. The newspapers never get tired with spreading gossip and shaping public images. Even more reason to be careful about the nature of a report before inserting its content into a Wikipedia article. Watching the original episode again, I noticed that Cliff Richard never used the word "undrinkable" for what was seemingly revealed as his own wine. Also, I think, the jovial character of the episode should be mentioned. Linguini 20:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I just copied the text from the original without double-checking it, thanks for the correction. However, I'm removing 'jokingly', since it doesn't represent a neutral point of view or an encyclopaedic tone. The article's bad enough - just stating the facts should be sufficient, and allow the reader to come to their own conclusions. Wibbble 21:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I clearly prefer when readers can come to their own conclusions. No problem if they could watch the episode for themselves. Here, they get the impression that "fuck off" was the immediate response to the revealing of the wine. In reality it was the response to Gordon Ramsay saying "you can tell me to fuck off now". How can a wrong impression be avoided without blowing up the passage with more detail? Linguini 21:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Er.. I think by remvoing 'jokingly' you have not removed a POV you have removed the context and utterly changed the meaning of the words. Jooler 21:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I would agree. Linguini 21:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

My goal is to make it as neutral as possible and avoid any more problems with the tone of the article, which is already pretty poor. Wibbble 22:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I see your point but I also have an interest in the readers getting a realistic impression of what happened. I'll rephrase it. Linguini 23:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

What form of Christianity did he convert to?

The article states Cliff Richard had a "conversion to Christianity." Could someone be more specific and state which church, denomination, or spectrum of faith he converted to? This would be an interesting aside I would think. Thanks. Cordially, Kevin Scott Marcus {e-mail kevinscottmarcus@hotmail.com or Waxworker@hotmail.com}.

Unless he was a Hindu or something before (he apparently was born in India, but I get the idea that he was of British, not Indian descent), these references need to be reworded. Probably, rather then converting to Christianity, he became religious or especially religious or he began to proselytize. TheScotch 09:00, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

He became a 'born-again' Christian during the Billy Graham rallies in the UK during the 1960s. I don't think I still have my signed copy of 'The Way I See It', but in that book he talks about his conversion. I believe he was connected with the Baptist church at Walton-upon-Thames at one point, but has attended an Evangelical Anglican church in that area for many years. Mish (talk) 10:52, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Worst video ever

I've removed this passage from the trivia section as there is no evidence either on the net or on the VH1 website that such an appointment of "worst video ever" would have taken place. Linguini 02:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

actually this clip was on youtube until it was deleted, apparently at the request of cliff's record company. not surprising if you've seen the video.--Gothicform 19:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Trivia NPOV?

In the trivia section we have the comment "Cliff featured in an episode of Jim'll Fix It coming out of a small tent with a child and surprising the child's mother. You can watch this television gem at Youtube" I think the term "gem" violates NPOV. Deckchair 13:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CliffRichard-DressedOccasion(cover).JPG

Image:CliffRichard-DressedOccasion(cover).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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 18:15, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Film career

Richard was "introduced" in the film Expresso Bongo. Could someone with more ability than I work this into the text? --81.149.133.88 15:39, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Moved here from article

Trivia

Sir Cliff Richard has had no fewer than 25 records (all formats) reach number one in UK music sales charts.
Home for Richard is a mansion on St Georges Hill Estate in Weybridge, Surrey, which he bought in 1987 for £1.4 million.
Richard owns several luxury vehicles, amongst them a 1980 Rolls Royce and a 1989 Range Rover. He also owns a 1990 Mercedes-Benz 500 SL.
Richard owns three thoroughbred horses, named Mars, Phobos, and Deimos, after the Greek God of War and his sons.
Richard has often remarked in interviews that he remained slim after hearing a remark on the British Soap Coronation Street made in the 1960s by Minnie Caldwell about "that chubby Cliff Richard".
British black metal band Cradle of Filth recorded a cover of his song "Devil Woman" for the special edition of their 2004 album Nymphetamine. The song features singer King Diamond on backing vocals.
Richard's "We Don't Talk Anymore" was one of the first ten music videos played by MTV on the channel's launch day - August 1, 1981.
In 1961 David Hockney painted a picture called 'Doll Boy'. The 24 year-old artist, then at the Royal College of Art in London, was inspired so to do because he found the idol of the British pop scene "very attractive, very sexy" as he did his delivery of the song Living Doll. Hockney had many postcards and photos he'd cut out of newspapers of Richard pinned up in his painting cubicle at the college.
Richard featured in an episode of 'Jim'll Fix It' coming out of a small tent with a child and surprising the child's mother.
In an interview at the premier of Spamalot in the West End Cliff Richard expressed his liking for the comedy of Monty Python and The Goon Show.
Richard was mentioned a lot in the comedy series The Young Ones owing to the character 'Rick' and his unhealthy infatuation with the singer. The four students met their demise in the last episode when they boarded a double decker bus (just like in the film Summer Holiday) and drove it over a 'cliff'.
Richard produces wine in his property in the Algarve, under the 'Vida Nova' brand.^[1] In 2005 his brand was awarded a bronze medal at the International Wine Challenge.^[2] Upon tasting his own wine in a blind test on Gordon Ramsay's The F-Word he described it as "very harsh". Ramsay said to Richard, "You can tell me to 'F off' now." Richard duly obliged. Sir Cliff owned property in the Algarve prior to the 1975 'revolution' which he sold cheaply and later said he regretted. He remains popular in Portugal.
Richard's favourite Christmas song is The Pogues' ribald classic "Fairytale of New York", as was revealed in his countdown on UK music channel Magic, "Cliff's 50 Christmas Classics".
Radio Ceylon made Cliff Richard a household name in the Indian sub-continent. Even people from Cliff's birthplace in Lucknow wrote in requesting his songs.
Cliff Richard was portrayed in the Thunderbirds movie performing his song, Shooting Star.
A fairground recently claimed that by playing certain Cliff Richard songs, they successfully deterred troublemakers from their premises. ^[3]

Censorship

It seems earlier references to sexuality in this article have been 'purged'. Some mention of the longstanding speculation over his sexual orientation is surely needed; ask any British people to name something noteworthy about Cliff Richard and, whether true or not, this aspect of his life is right up there, with his religious beliefs. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 03:37, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

If you have sources that talk about it, put it in, and provide your verifiable sources. Jons63 (talk) 03:43, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

How about this from the BBC? http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A853012 However, as previous references to this topic have been deleted would there be any point in trying to get in into the article? Vauxhall1964 (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't find the deletions you are talking about. Can you give a link, please? DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:17, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Harry/Harold Rodger Webb

I just reverted a change from 'Harold'→'Harry'. However, this may need reapplying. A quick WP:GHITS comes up with 4,000+ hits for "Harry ..." and less than 10 for "Harold ...". —Sladen (talk) 23:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Reliable sources

This article is poorly sourced; unfortunately it loses substantial creditability because of this. Refrence #4 "^ actor, actress, singer and celebrity when they were young | childhoodCELEBS.com" may or may not posses accurate facts about Cliff Richard's date and place of birth, but it says nothing coherent about his ethnicity. It is quite apparent that this web site "childhoodCELEBS.com" is some sort of "Scraper Site" attempting to manipulate the Google ad-words infrastructure and can hardly be considered a reliable source. Richardsidler (talk) 23:20, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Blacknight

I've added reference in the post 1995 section to Sir Cliff's release of a song under a pseudonym to demonstrate that his name stopped radio stations playing his songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.203.6.200 (talk) 14:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Personal life

Isn't it a bit odd that this article doesn't mention *anything* about his personal life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BoogieRock (talk • contribs) 12:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is very odd. Everything that is added seems to get deleted. I've put in a short paragraph - if someone has any objections to it then let's please hear the arguments for and against and we'll then decide the best course to take. Contaldo80 (talk) 12:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I am concerned that some contributor's might feel they have personal 'ownership' of this article? I hope my feelings are misplaced. How else to explain the fact that text is regularly deleted without any rationale? Let's be a bit more open about this please. Contaldo80 (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Visiting the article randomly, I also found it odd that it was missing a section on his personal life and the discussions about his sexuality. I've added such a section and have backed up everything with verifiable and reliable sources, so hopefully that should be enough for anyone worried about BLP issues, etc. I imagine any ownership or censorship problems will become apparent if it all disappears or gets "cleaned up". Personally I have no interest in claiming something if it is not true, particularly when the man is not anti-gay (in fact he is positive on the issue), but I do think that the widespread rumours/questions (which he comments on himself) should be included for enquiring minds. GeneralBelly (talk) 23:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I edited out references to him having shared an apartment and had a friendship with Clay Aitken. The source doesn't mention this and I couldn't find any reference to this on the Internet or in his latest autobiography. I can only assume it was simply added to increase the inference that he is gay. --Figment81 (talk) 06:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I am removing this sentence:

Asserting that society no longer limits loving relationships to heterosexual couples, he has called on the Church of England to "accept those of other sexualities into the one and only religion".[13]'

... for two reasons:

1. Although the general sentiment of the beginning section is correct, the "quotation" at the end seems to have been invented out of thin air. The reference article provided as citation #13 does not contain any quote even remotely resembling the above, nor can I find it in any other reference listed here or anywhere else.

and

2. It contains a phrase which is in clear opposition to Cliff Richard's own stated views on religion - the characterization of the Church of England as "the one and only religion". Richard's religious views are quite clearly and frequently spoken, and are in fact practically the polar opposite of this. For instance:

"The real Islam is going through what we went through when people thought that only they had a special privilege to truth, and that's always the danger - when men or women believe that they are the only ones that have all the truth, they become violent..." (from an interview found on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ja5TkpfL_k, accessed Tuesday December 17 2008)

In fact, since he quite often and eloquently expresses such views publicly, it might be appropriate to include a section on his religious statements in the main article!

At any rate, I am replacing the text quoted above with a direct quote on gay marriage taken from Richard's autobiography, with title and page references. 71.161.70.184 (talk) 21:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

The acts with the most aggregate time spent on the British record charts

The article says "The acts with the most aggregate time spent on the British record charts: Current rankings (by weeks):

  1. Elvis Presley (2,574)
  2. Cliff Richard (1,983)
  3. Queen (1,755)
  4. The Beatles (1,749)
  5. Madonna (1,660)
  6. Elton John (1,626)"

But that can't remain true as Queen and Cliff have both charted recently, and it can't be long before the others all do. So we need eithe rto keep this updated or give a date at which those stats were true. Can the person who added them help? DavidFarmbrough (talk) 07:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

The article indicates Cliff Richard was Christmas number one in 1999, but the Christmas number ones article states Westlife were Christmas number one that year. One or the other must be wrong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alltruism (talk • contribs) 13:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

True. Millenium Prayer was no.1 from 28th November until the Xmas No.1 week when he was toppled by Westlife. So Cliff was no.2 that year for the Xmas Week Chart. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.163.60 (talk) 13:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Indian ancestry

I am of Anglo-Indian descent and I have always known that Cliff Richard has indian blood in him.Older members of my family knew the family in India. I was a fan of Cliff many years ago as as a young boy growing up to the sound of Cliff and the Beatles in the UK.We had a certain amount of pride that some one from India had made it big in the UK. Engelbert Humpderdink is also from India and is Anglo-Indian, unlike Cliff his skin tone does not hide that fact, while Cliff is light skinned he trys to pass himself off as English As years have passed, I did not want to be a fan any more, for the simple reason that Cliff does not or won't admit that he is of Indian origin, almost as though he is as ashamed of being an Anglo-Indian or being part indian. I may be just one fan lost to Cliff, but he has thousands so he won't worry about losing one fan, the day he admits that he is Anglo-Indian will be the day I will listen to his music, don't be ashamed of your roots!!!! I find this behavour rather dishonest and insulting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronmiddleton (talk • contribs) 16:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a forum for personal views. Sympathetic while I personally am, I think we need to focus only on the article itself. Thanks. Contaldo80 (talk) 17:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Can anyone prove whether or not he has any Indian blood? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 12:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Vandalism

I notice this article gets vandalised an awful lot - certainly more than the bulk of other articles I have on my watchlist. Should we maybe consider some sort of security measure - such as locking so only registered users can make changes? Contaldo80 (talk) 16:40, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I totally agree. Only registered users should be able to make changes. The vandalism is coming from irresponsible anonymous users who do not care about being suspended. They are just having fun at our expense, have nothing useful to add anyhow and are wasting time and effort of Wikipedia established editors. I further suggest that this becomes a permenant arrangement for this page and not just a temporary restriction. werldwayd (talk) 07:05, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Legal battle

I seem to remember that in the 1980s Sir Cliff sued a newspaper (I thing it was The Sun) for alleging he used rent boys. I think that the article should incorporate this. 77.234.159.97 (talk) 10:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Certainly not without a verifiable reference. Viewfinder (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

IM AMAZED THAT THERE CAN BE AN ARTICLE ABOUT CLIFF RICHARD,,,WITHOUT A SINGLE MENTION OF THE THREE BACKING SINGER'S,, TONY RIVERS ,,JOHN PERRY,, AND THE LATE,GREAT STU CALVER??? ,,,THIER WONDERFUL HARMONIES ON "DADDY,S HOME".AND SUBSEQUENT ARRANGMENTS,, AND NOT A WORD,,SHAME ON YOU,..THIS IS JUST MY OPINION,,,,. I USED TO BE A FAN OF CLIFF~S94.192.55.153 (talk) 07:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)RON THOMPSON,,

Legacy

Is the Legacy section some kind of joke or awaiting expansion (and should be removed until completed)? 82.132.136.198 (talk) 17:56, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

It was an overlooked vandalism from yesterday. Now removed 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 20:55, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Question Marks

I am bothered with the big number of question marks allowed here. Can somebody add in he missing numbers or is there a way to avoid all this?

Producers
19??-19??: Stuart Coleman
19??-19??: Andrew Lloyd Webber
19??-19??: Richard Hewson
19??-19??: Cliff Richard
19??-19??: Craig Pruess
19??-19??: Terry Britten
19??-19??: Mike Batt
19??-19??: Stock, Aitken & Waterman
19??-19??: Paul Moessl
19??-19??: 'Wolf'
19??-19??: Nigel Wright
Live albums
197? Live in Korea - 2LP - ?.
200? The Hit list - DVD - EMI?.
200? Live here and now - DVD - EMI?.
200? Castles in the air - DVD - EMI?
Management
196?-197?. Peter Gormley, Peter Gormley Mgt.
197?-2009. Cliff Richard Organisation, Esher, Surrey.

Can't we say for producers that so and so also produced his music??? Album dates should not be a problem... Any help to fill in the missing data? werldwayd (talk) 01:20, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Redundant Sections like Live albums / HMV acetate / Engineers at EMI

The abovementioned three sections in the main Cliff Roichard page are redundant and meaningless. There is a full Live albums section at Cliff Richard discography. I strongly propose deleting these two sections or merging them in the appropriate section in Cliff Richard discography. And just what purpose does it serve to have a section like Engineers at EMI?? werldwayd (talk) 06:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Bibliography Section

This section has become a pot-pourri of badly organized collection of doubtable so-called "references" with names of writers missing, publishing companies missing, years with ?? question marks as folows:

Bibliography
195?: "Driftin' with Cliff Richard", by J.Harris, R.Ellis and C.Richard.
196?: "It's great to be young". Coronet
1973: "The Way I See It Now", Hodder & Stoughton, London.
1988: "Single-Minded" (autobiography), Hodder & Stoughton, London.
1993: "Cliff Richard - The Biography", Lion, Oxford
2008: "My Life, My Way".
1994: "The complete chronicle".
199?: "Which one's Cliff". Coronet. ISBN : 0340271590
199?: "You, me and Jesus".
1992: "Cliff Richard - A Celebration".
1992: "The Biography", by S.Turner. ISBN 9780745952796
1983: "A 25 year journal 1958-83", by T.Jasper.
199?: "Single minded".
199?: "A 40th Celebration".
199?: "Cliff for the record", by S.Turner.
2008: "The Bachelor Boy", by S.Turner. ISBN 9781844420377

I suggest some knowledgeable editor takes care of this and provides just a standrad acceptable way of presenting and a relevant biography. The way it is now is unacceptable for a Wikipedia page werldwayd (talk) 06:53, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Talking.

I have done it. David.from Sydney Australia ph mob. 0488795589 or 0297460241 Australian #s —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.106.15.23 (talk) 03:33, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

record

the song ocean deep where did it get in the top twenty regards mike —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.20.255.33 (talk) 15:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Is Cliff Richard a Radio Amateur?

I have found many links stating a Radio Amateur callsign for a Harry R Webb

Call Sign: W2JOF Grant Date: 10/24/1997, Expiration Date: 10/24/2007, Cancelation Date: 05/13/1999 Registrant: Harry R Webb, 10733 Footprint Ln, Port Richey, FL 34668

Taken from this web page "www.city-data.com/aradio/lic-Port-Richey-Florida.html"

The following link is a search and most mention Sir Cliff Richard AKA Harry R Webb

uk.yhs.search.yahoo.com/avg/search?fr=yhs-avg&type=yahoo_avg_hs2-tb-web_uk&p=famous%20radio%20amateurs

--Qaho (talk) 00:53, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Christianity

The introduction states Cliff converted to Christianity, but this conversion is never mentioned in the article itself? When did it take place? I always thought he was Christian all his life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.6.95.4 (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

was he jewish?, converted to christianity from what? atheism? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.202.232.89 (talk) 14:18, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

So, if it's not correct, change it! Which I just did Santamoly (talk) 01:22, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I have no citable evidence to hand but it's my understanding that Richard had no strong beliefs as a young man and was converted to being a Jehovah's Witness early in his career, possibly by Hank Marvin. It was only after he left the JW that he started professing to be a Christian. Does anybody have any corroboratng evidence for this? Mrstonky (talk) 09:08, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Overlinking

There is definitely overlinking in this article, in the form of repeated links.

WP:OVERLINK states:

In general, link only the first occurrence of an item. This is a rule of thumb that has many exceptions, including the following:

where a later occurrence of an item is a long way from the first.
where the first link was in an infobox or a navbox, or some similar meta-content.
tables, in which each row should be able to stand on its own.
where a link to a significant related topic occurs embedded in the text of an article it may be useful to have a duplicate link in a "see also" section to make it easier to find.

I know the article has the "wikification" tag, but that doesn't mean people should go crazy with linking! Wwwhatsup (talk) 16:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

1958–1963: Success and stardom

I have two comments on this section.:

1. Much of it is unreferenced. It is well researched and documented in Pete Frame's excellent "The Restless Generation" ISBN 9780952954071

2. I'm surprised there is no mention of Expresso Bongo in the feature film paragraph. Wwwhatsup (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

"the Shadows" or "The Shadows"?

What's the view? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.115.202 (talk) 21:55, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Consensus seems to be on The Beatles that since they were never called "Beatles", without "The", that it should be capitalised as a mass noun. However, much blood has been shed in this process, and I wouldn't be keen on rehashing the same old arguments. The problems is that editors will point to sources for both capitalisations, so that doesn't help. It's really a standards issue. Rodhull andemu 01:51, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Addendum: The debate on "the" versus "The", although having merits, is now included in WP:LAME. Rodhull andemu 01:56, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

The bottom part of this article is shocking. Swathes of info needs to be reorganised or thrown out. Personnel? Line ups? Is this really needed - it looks a mess. Not to mention the random TV appearances - hardly notable and with unsourced viewing figures. Also the videography section could be moved to his discography. The first half of the article is pretty good though, so it's a shame.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 11:03, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Weeks or days?

Someone made this edit without any explanation. The original had been in place for many months. I suppose it should be obvious, but I'm not sure which is right. Is this vandalism or a needed correction? 86.134.43.126 (talk) 02:12, 22 April 2010 (UTC).

Archiving

This page was getting unwieldy, so I've archived discussions from before the beginning of 2010 ~dom Kaos~ (talk) 17:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Edits in the last month

Many of the recent edits of 86.158.30.31 [2] and 86.138.29.250 [3]- one can safely assume they are one and the same editor - appear to be single-minded and opinionated. This includes the entire "Allegations of bias against Cliff Richard & The Shadows" section, which one would imagine which is surely for the chop via WP:NOTSOAPBOX. Further edits include changing the middle name in the infobox to "Roderic". In fact - if one looks at the history of the last month[4] there is practically nothing of value or sourced except an improved ref in the "personal life" section. Is there any good reason not to revert? Wwwhatsup (talk) 23:43, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Apparently not only soapboxing, but WP:BLP and WP:NPOV violations, so I have removed the whole section pending negotiation here of what it should contain (if anything). Since auto-confirmed editors are involved, this has to be full protection, but will be for a week in the first instance until sources are provided, along with neutral tone. If this continues thereafter, I will extend the protection until agreement is reached. If agreement can't be reached here, you have various forms of dispute resolution open to you. Rodhull andemu 23:58, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I am not really involved myself with this article, until I read this section, which seems to be very problematic. I did try to neutralise some of it, and tag it, which was then reverted. I cannot say I am moved towards doing what it would take to address the problems, as it does seem as you say, and while there might be some point in saying something in one sentence that would cover this, a whole section is WP:UNDUE. I started watching a couple of the BBC documentaries referred to, but TBH they were dull, and nobody of any significance seemed to be featured (not just the Shads). So, I fully endorse your actions, and feel this section has no place in a BLP (especially as it focusses mostly on The Shadows).

I also tried to rework some of the synthesis about Richard's sexuality. I have noticed that some of the text I did needs slight correction; nothing substantial.Mish (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Both in Personal life:

Change one (minor correction) in paragraph one, clarify this is about 'him' being gay quote needs closing:

For some time there has been speculation about his sexuality in the media, and in response to rumours about being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it.

Should read:

For some time there has been speculation about his sexuality in the media, and in response to rumours about him being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it".

To be pedantically grammatical it should read:

For some time there has been speculation about his sexuality in the media, and in response to rumours about his being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.174.7 (talk) 13:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

Change two (minor correction) in paragraph two, syntax:

Richard has called on the Church of England should affirm people's commitment in same-sex marriage.

'should' ought to read 'to':

Richard has called on the Church of England to affirm people's commitment in same-sex marriage.

Thanks.Mish (talk) 08:11, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mish, I think your first correction should read:

For some time there has been speculation in the media about his sexuality, and in response to rumours about him being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it".

or even (as "for some time" is a bit weaselly)

There has often been speculation in the media about his sexuality, and in response to rumours about him being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it".

—User:MDCollins (talk) 10:13, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree, although the often seems unnecessary qualification.

There has often been speculation in the media about his sexuality, and in response to rumours about him being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it".

Asked about rumours in the media about him being homosexual, Richard has said: "I am sick to death of the media’s speculation about it".

Thanks. Could somebody with the necessary rights make these amendments please. Mish (talk) 12:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

New batch of edits

Presumably the same anon editor has been back at work, adding a long list of countries and other details.diff. There is just too much information in the article. It should be split off into sub articles - like the existing Cliff Richard discography. Every single songwriting credit ? C'mon now! Show me another major artist on Wikipedia that gets similar treatment! Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Songs

So far, this is an unsourced list of songs written or co-written by Richard. The material should already be covered in Cliff Richard discography, or in individual articles for the singles and albums. Whatever the outcome, it just bloats this article and duplicates information available elsewhere. At best, it should be spun off into List of songs written by Cliff Richard, and sourced. Rodhull andemu 23:40, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I've tagged this, as it's currently an unsourced mess. If it isn't fixed pronto, I'll delete this, since nobody is discussing the proposed merge, or adding sources. Seven days. Rodhull andemu 01:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I do not know much about Cliff Richard. I needed to know whether he was just a singer or whether he also wrote music or lyrics (not a list of such music or lyrics). I was unable to get that basic information from this long wikipedia article. I did not take the time to read it in detail, but this kind of information should be available at the very beginning. He is presented as a singer ... not as a song writer or a composer. I think that is a lot more important than most details to be found in the article. The article starts with "Sir Cliff Richard, OBE (born Harry Rodger Webb; 14 October 1940)[1] is a British pop singer, musician, performer, actor, entrepreneur and philanthropist" ... why not simply add composer and song writer, if that is the case. Or make it clear that he was not. Bernard Lang (talk) 21:03, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Clean up (continued)

The whole second half of the article is a mess and resembles a fan's collection of whatever they can think of next. This whole page needs to be pulled into line with wikipedia and the second half needs major sourcing - if not, get rid of everything beyond the main body of the biography. This is pretty much what I said above, but it seems to be getting worse rather than better.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:26, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Mish (talk) 02:16, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm having a go at cleaning up the article. I've removed the following sections for the following reasons:

Recordings released worldwide/by decade/format - Totally unnecessary, almost every artist has had their recording released in several countries worldwide and in various formats
Chart accomplishments/Christmas songs - Should already be in the main body of the article and in individual articles for songs/albums - doesn't need to be repeated yet again
Tours and concerts - Kept the headline with a link to the appropriate article
All time top 50 - Again, should be mentioned in the main article, a list of the whole top 10 is unnecessary
TV appearances - His own TV shows are fine, but a list of every TV show he's ever appeared in (over 50 years!) is totally ridiculous - and the list is woefully incomplete anyway
Career line-ups - A list of all his backing musicians is unimportant
Songs written by Cliff Richard - has no place in any article really, the songs themselves are unnotable and any that are will have an article
Personnel - seems to be heading towards a list of everyone who's worked with him (recording engineers?)
Further reading - seems excessive, have cut it down to completely credited works

Other sections; Videography and duets have been shipped out to his Discography page where they seem more appropriate. I'm thinking the list of awards won is OK, although needs to be sourced, or perhaps given its own page? Perhaps not. I've kept that anyway, and I'm a bit unsure about the list of his homes and properties.

I do apologise to the editor who added in all this information, but unfortunately Wikipedia isn't the place for a list of miscellaneous or trivial information.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 13:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Good work! Keep it up! Wwwhatsup (talk) 17:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, decided that the list of his homes wasn't really important either, so moved some of the information to the Personal life section. I've done probably most I will with it now and removed my tag, although perhaps the article needs more sourcing.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 01:35, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Rodger or Harry ?

Early paragraphs of this article refer to him variously as "Harry Webb" or "Rodger Webb". Unless this changed at some point in his childhood, there needs to be consistency here. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is any inconsistency. Harry Rodger Webb is Cliff, and Rodger Webb is his father. This is clear to me when reading the article.Eastclif (talk) 03:21, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Bhattacharjee or Dazely ?

In the section 1940-58, Cliff's mother's maiden name is given as Bhattacharjee with no citation. However in [5] the maiden name is given as Dazely. Which is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Murfas (talk • contribs) 16:51, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

length of career

at the start of the third paragraph there is a stated length of career "Over a 52-year career", as his career is still continuing (its now up to 55years) this would not be proper, i would suggest re-wording as "Over his career"

Pga1965 (talk) 03:37, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Earliest Career?

As a boy, circa 1960, I remember seeing a dated British 'B' film based on Kipling's 'Kim' - "Sabhu" at a childrens matinee. Even then it was obvious to me that the lead juvenile was Cliff and his boyish Anglo-Indian good looks were very appropriate for the part. When I pointed this out to friends they said I was mistaken; when we checked the Credits it stated Sabhu was a certain 'Harry Webb', so we agreed it wasn't Cliff!! Later I learnt of his bith-name. I find it strange that this early acting career is never mentioned. It also explains his ease in his early pop-rock films, much more natural than, say, the Beatles or similar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.139.226.86 (talk) 08:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

There's no evidence on www.imdb.com or on the web that such a film existed, let alone Cliff Richard starred in it. Vauxhall1964 (talk) 13:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

"Sabu" was an Indian actor. His first film (Elephant Boy, 1937) was written by Kipling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.228.144.143 (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Karlekens Sprak protests

This article says they happened in 1979, but since the film came out in 1969, might this be a typo? The reference is for a print book I don't have access to and I couldn't find any info online. Anyone feel like fact checking this? Tdimhcs (talk) 08:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

1971. (U.S. Amazon has a "Look Inside" for it.) Changed. Fat&Happy (talk) 16:33, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Clarification of Anglo-Indian

Anglo-Indian can mean Eurasian people, or white people who whose families lived in India for many generations.

Which is Cliff? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.78.170.148 (talk) 10:43, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

The latter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.147.141.92 (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The former. His mother, at least, was Indian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.102.69 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

I always thought it was his grandmother.124.120.141.190 (talk) 04:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Philanthropist?? Source citation??

Cliff Richard philanthropist?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.23.58 (talk) 23:49, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

The article cites several places about his charitable giving (though maybe not enough detail). It's one of the reasons why he was knighted. --Musdan77 (talk) 23:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

If the article is to make a feature of his charitable giving (uncited) it should also reference his tax avoidance and campaigIng to extend copyright when the end of the 50 years of royalties from his early recordings was approaching. His accumulation of wealth and efforts to increase it still further is much more prominent than any claimed charitable giving. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.130.102.69 (talk) 22:35, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

His charitable trust is sourced. You are free to add any well sourced info on his tax avoidance and his campaign on royalties.--Egghead06 (talk) 06:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Languages of Cliff

I think there should be mentioned the many languages which cliff sang like Japanes or German . MJ1982 (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

#1 singles, lead section

In the introductory section, it says the following: "He has achieved 14 UK No. 1 singles (or 18, depending on the counting methodology)" - shouldn't the bracketed section have a citation (or a "citation needed" link)? 86.132.183.123 (talk) 12:54, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

None of the other three?

The article says: 'None of the other three played with the later and better known Shadows, although Samwell wrote songs for Richard's later career.' Who out of the four did? It doesn't say.--78.146.175.69 (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Infobox image

It looks like he has choked on a chicken bone in [6] and is about to throw up. How about [7], possibly with some cropping?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2014

This edit request to Cliff Richard has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add: On 14 August 2014 police searched a Berkshire property belonging to Cliff Richard in relation to an alleged historical sex offence involving a boy under 16. No arrests have been made and Cliff Richard said the allegation was "completely false". Shadraymo (talk) 18:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 03:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Done actually, another editor added similar content with a reliable source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Long personal life section

I feel like there need to be more sub-sections. Also, the 'Philanthropy' sub-section could go under a section called 'Other ventures', like in Beyoncé's article. Shiningroad (talk) 05:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I'll second this. In addition to sub-sections, quite a bit of that info is excessive and can be shortened.LM2000 (talk) 05:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Complexion

The early life section stated beyond any doubt that Cliff's "slightly dark" complexion came from a Spanish great-great-grandmother.

For a start, this is playing God to assume that any feature of any human came from any ancestor, especially one so distant. Would any source about hereditary baldness ever be permitted in the article about Prince William?

Secondly, such an assumption, even if written as "a biography claimed that..." as I changed it to, is crass and fetishistic. I doubt that even with citations, it would be permitted to write on the article about Ryan Giggs that his "slightly dark complexion" came from his Sierra Leonese grandfather.

I propose either to keep it as it is "A biography attributed the Spanish ancestry", or to remove the whole complexion sentence completely. '''tAD''' (talk) 21:23, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

The Steve Turner biography is more reliable than newspaper articles. Turner, a notable writer, addresses Richard's heritage directly, telling us that "only the sketchiest descriptions of his grandparents" existed prior to his research, which is why "it has often been rumoured that Cliff's dark looks are due to mixed race," the mixture being rumoured as partly Indian. Turner investigated the matter by studying the files of the India Office Library in London, and he found Richard's half-Welsh, half-Spanish grandmother. Turner found a photo of this woman in middle-age, having "distinctively Mediterranean looks which she passed on to her children," including of course Richard's mother, who passed the dark complexion to Richard.

So Turner is the only person who has gotten to the bottom of the issue, who has based his conclusion on more than hearsay. I should think Turner's hard work would be respected by Wikipedia over rumour and insinuation.

The bit about Spanish ancestry and darker skin colouring is important for us to keep in the article, to dispel the various rumours that appear from time to time in unreliable rags such as the Daily Mail. Let's not remove it, and let's attribute the conclusion to Steve Turner rather than some bog-standard unnamed biography. Binksternet (talk) 00:07, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Police search

"Eight plain-clothed police officers in five unmarked cars conducted the search"

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Sex-assault-claims-completely-false-insists-Cliff/story-22752611-detail/story.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.141.117.40 (talk) 12:27, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Get ready for IP edits ahoy. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 12:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Quite. I think a single sentence (or two) should suffice; Richard himself addressed the voluminous internet rumors in his statement on the search. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 14:54, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

In light of the plethora of reliable sources, I don't see how we can keep this from the article. That is, of course, unless we don't care about Wikipedia's integrity. However, I am in favor of waiting until there is a palpable result. Chunk5Darth (talk) 21:13, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Birth year

A long time ago, when I was a boy, Cliff's birth year was given as 1938. Somewhere along the line he seems to have lost a couple of years. Or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.198.82.84 (talk) 07:48, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Britannica (which is of course far more reliable than Wikipedia) gives 1940, as do most online sources. It is not unknown for celebrities to reduce their ages in Who's Who. This probably happened with Alan Whicker, but does not seem to have happened with Cliff Richard.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 09:02, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Quotes

The article suffers from too many quotes at present. Per WP:QUOTE, all but the most important ones should be summarised. Anyone fancy taking this on? --John (talk) 12:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

I believe that Cliff Richard's statement following a serious allegation made against him is important and appropriate to be included - and perhaps the most important quote that could actually be included in this article. The statement was given with a reliable source. The statement addresses allegations and his reasons for not responding to allegations which had been circulating online prior to the property search.

Richard stated: "For many months I have been aware of allegations against me of historic impropriety which have been circulating online. The allegations are completely false. Up until now I have chosen not to dignify the false allegations with a response, as it would just give them more oxygen. However, the police attended my apartment in Berkshire without notice, except it would appear to the press. It goes without saying that I will cooperate fully should the police wish to speak to me."

I have no issue with the trimming of other quotes that were later trimmed on 17 August 2014 (UK time) but Richard's statement I feel is important as it addresses serious allegations. Regards, Kind Tennis Fan (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

I totally appreciate why you would say that and I appreciate the sensitivities involved. However I think Richard's public denial of the chages can be adequately depicted without fully quoting his statement. I would welcome further discussion of the exact wording we use but I do think the article suffers from excessive quoting and I would not support the full quote being used. --John (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Mentioning the August 2014 allegations in the lead section

This version of the lead section is seriously flawed. It gives the impression that out of a 50 year career, revoking his UK residency, living in Barbados and Portugal, and being an alleged sex abuser are by far the most important things that a person needs to know about Cliff Richard. The WP:LEAD should be a summary of important aspects of a person's career, up to four paragraphs in length. The previous version was broadly OK, and major changes to the lead section should reflect WP:CONSENSUS. Other relevant policies are WP:RECENTISM, WP:WEIGHT, WP:10YT and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. The August 2014 allegations are not suitable for the lead at the moment, as they could have blown over in six months' time. Let's keep a sense of perspective here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

IMO these should be mentioned briefly in the lead by way of referring the reader to a seprate section, which is bound to grow in size. This should be a subssection of 'controversies', the copyright really isn't controversial. For the record I'm not a fan but believe he has been treated appallingly by police and BBC. Wiki should airbrush, but shouldn't over-emphasise. Everyone knows about these allegations know so nothing is acheived by silence except raising questions that this page is a fansite. Sceptic1954 (talk) 08:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a great Cliff Richard fan (sorry Cliff) and don't think that the current brouhaha is lead-worthy. He would have to be arrested and charged for this to be of lead section importance.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:42, 23 August 2014

(UTC)

It's the controversy caused that is noteworthy. Moreover it has caused him to cancel concerts.Sceptic1954 (talk) 08:48, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

It is notable enough for a mention, but Cliff Richard has a 50 year plus career and this is a very recent controversy. It is too early to say how this will turn out, so it is not suitable for the lead at the moment. Ironically, it is the BBC's over-the-top coverage which has become the subject of controversy and criticism. The section 2014 property search and sex assault allegation may look like undue weight in six months' time if he is not arrested or charged.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 10:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

The same editor has also added a reference to the supposed "controversy" at Tony Hall, Baron Hall of Birkenhead. I've removed it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

spanish heritage?

Rebeiro is a portuguese last name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.202.240.123 (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

The Spanish characterization comes from the biography cited. Google turns up many references to Rebeiro being from Goa, which could support claims of Portuguese and/or Indian ancestry, but these comments are mostly from Facebook pages, blogs, and the like. They may trace back to a November 2011 story in The Daily Mail, but that tabloid itself is not considered among the best sources for a BLP. Do you have any reliable sources supporting this view of Ribiero's roots? 2600:1006:B123:235C:5AD:4287:E314:1B02 (talk) 20:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

I am from a spanish speaking country and I know the 2 form of the last name, Rivero (spanish) Ribeiro (portuguese) but I don´t know a lot of Cliff Richard, just about the language of the last name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.202.241.114 (talk) 10:54, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

[1] Vida Nova Wines

[2] WineInt.com

[3] Crooning Cliff disperses yobs (METRO.co.uk)

[1]

[2]

[3]