Talk:Lesley Garrett

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

See WP:FOOTNOTES for an explanation of the <ref></ref> method. - Motor (talk) 22:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too much personal information[edit]

I removed a load of personal information which does not seem to be appropriate. Why would the article need the names and schools of her kids, husband's practice, etc? This seemed to me like fact for the sake of fact rather than what the article needs. DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 07:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Names of children is basic biographical information which should be included; the other points mentioned are not. Nietzsche 2 (talk) 00:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the response. I don't see by what definition "Names of children is basic biographical information which should be included". This is, surely, an article about a soprano and while it might be vaguely interesting that she has a family, I can't see why the article would need to specify that these are little Tamsin, Colin the talented ballet dancer, Zippo the Cat and her glamorous brain surgeon husband Dr Roger. Or whoever. That would seem to me to be merely including facts because one has them, not because they are required in the article; and I do feel that the subjects of articles have some kind right to privacy. The names of Garrett's husband and children are not that widely known - I mean, not like say Peaches Geldof - and I can't see why they need to be included here. In what way would they make the article better, other than some empirical claim that more facts are always better than fewer? I am honestly not arguing this just to be awkward - there does seem to me to be a principle involved. Thanks and best wishes DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 07:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Garrett has openly talked about her family on ITV1's Loose Women. Not including close relatives' names/basic info on Wiki as a way of respecting her/their privicy is not appropriate if she is more than willing to supply the details herself. It's hardly intrusive stuff, just basic background information. 86.2.48.247 (talk) 13:24, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If the information can be well sourced, there is no reason why it can't be added here. As it stands, it wasn't sourced so that is a valid reason for removing it. However, if it can be sourced, then there is no reason to not include the basic details (names, DOBs). I agree though that schools and names of practices are not appropriate. ~~ [ジャム][t - c] 13:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for the interesting and thoughtful responses. I'll try to respond when I get a minute, which I don't have right now. (And my just shouting you're wrong so ner ner nee noo na might not quite cut it as a serious editorial debating point. :) ) In the meantime, I wanted to make sure you were aware of a small debate about it here: Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Refining policy regarding use of children's/minors' names or (possibly here!) - I got into this after my initial interaction with someone over this issue here, and since you clearly have a view, I wondered if you might be interested in this more general discussion. Cheers DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the children's names again. It is pretty clear here that they are not appropriate for the article. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 14:22, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the children's names again. It is pretty clear here that they are not appropriate for the article. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am a fan of Lesley and have been following her for about 15 years. I have met over to speak to over 300 times. When I first started the children were “off limits” when they were accompanying her. There was restricted access, and definitely no photographs. However, they are now practically adult. Nearly two years ago she was appearing in a charity concert with a fund-raising reception afterwards. Lesley joined in, as she nearly always does, but on this occasion she bought her children and encouraged them to mix with us fans. If anyone does want to know their names (and dates of birth) just buy her book and look them up in the index. Rob Steel

I have updated the list of solo albums. I have also made a few corrections to the "Early Life" section. My source is the many talks Lesley hase made about her life, confirmed by her autobiography, "Notes From a Small Soprano". I have not added "Notes" to the list of references because I could not get it to properly. Rob Steel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.96.18 (talk) 09:48, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would say naming spouses is not intrusive. I am sure there would be no debate were this article about a dead person as in "Who Was Who" or the "Oxford Dictionary of National Biography" where there is routine information on marriages and would be of incidental genealogical interest. I would leave naming children to discretion.Cloptonson (talk) 07:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Performances at sporting events[edit]

What is the point of the "Performances at sporting events" section? It seems painfully trivial to record things where she sang for one minute, and seems to get close to, if not breach, WP:NOTNEWSPAPER. Parts in operas, and recordings issued, seem less ephemeral. Are we to list every note she's sung, however insubstantial a gig or non-gig it was at? I do hope not. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 11:46, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She considered her performance at the 2000 FA Cup Final to be worth including in her biography on her own website, so I don't understand why you consider it unworthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. Clearly such performances are an awful lot shorter than her performances in operas, but they're seen by an awful lot more people, given the vast worldwide television audiences for an FA Cup final or the culmination of the Tour de France, so are the way a lot of people get to hear her. Regards, Qwfp (talk) 17:37, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, firstly, I wouldn't necessarily take what she or her publicity drones want to put on her website as indicative of what an encyclopaedia should include; I think it should be judged on its own merits since the purposes are so different. I also don't understand why this has suddenly become important - there seems to be some malice here and a bit of bandwagon-jumping by people desperate to get in something about how terrible she was in Paris having her (<gag>) Cliff Richard moment. Personally I think it's de minima and to be honest a bit of an example of Wikipedia at its shittest, but fortunately it doesn't really matter what I think, so I will leave it to others to fuck around with it edit it in a neutral and sensible manner and I will unwatch this, forget it, and go and edit something I find more interesting. Cheers. DBaK (talk) 22:52, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Strictly Come Dancing[edit]

Was it not the case that at one time she was on Strictly Come Dancing? This could go in the article somewhere - I think she went on the programme when she was trying to reduce how much she contributed to professional opera singing (and she did criticised by the opera community for this). ACEOREVIVED (talk) 22:08, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on Lesley Garrett. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 16:15, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Lesley Garrett. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lesley Garrett. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:17, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lesley_Garrett&oldid=1220846283"