Talk:Axl Rose/Archive 3

Botched hair transplant?
It's common knowledge he received a botched hair transplant and it's very surprising it's not mentioned in this biographical article, considering his hair was almost inseparable from his persona. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.65.92.67 (talk) 15:39, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I would really know more about this story... does anyone have some information ? (Hope that was right English - I m from Austria :) ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.139.73.117 (talk) 13:18, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Is his vocal range only three octaves?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/music-news/10848713/Axl-Rose-has-a-larger-vocal-range-than-Mariah-Carey.html Axl's vocals sound much broader than 3, especially considering how deep his voice is in real life. 2601:8:9800:64C:61DF:9ADE:A229:4AEC (talk) 10:55, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit request
Please change the category "singers with a three-octave vocal range" to "singers with a five-octave vocal range", source: http://therangeplace.forummotions.com/t2858-axl-rose-william-bruce-bailey-rose-j ; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KIXiy5sTBM + https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtpOEug8kqk and http://www.concerthotels.com/worlds-greatest-vocal-ranges Abstrakt8 (talk) 16:40, 17 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The question is, is The Range Place a reliable source? It looks, at first glance, to be a forum; is there any curation or editorial review there? —C.Fred (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

It looks like the author of the thread analysed different songs and came up with that conclusion. Data they obtained looks legit. The video is for sure a reliable source. The only way to find out is to hear for yourself. And where is the source for "three-octave range"? For justifying Mariah Carey's vocal range, a NYTimes article was used. For Freddie Mercury, a an article from rollingstone.com was used. About A. Rose, it says "There's maybe five people in the world that can sing in his range." source - http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/100-greatest-singers-of-all-time-19691231/axl-rose-20101202#ixzz3xXBRyScL For Christina Aguilera's vocal range, http://time.com/105319/compare-vocal-ranges-of-worlds-greatest-singers/ was used as a source. It says the same thing as the range place about Axl Rose. I'm pretty sure we can use it as a source for this article. The range place was already used as a source, here — Abstrakt8 (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Padlock-bronze-open.svg Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Bazj (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Edit request
Edit request: "Second baritone" has no real meaning, and it's definitely not in the reference cited. Just make it "baritone". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.68.134.1 (talk) 23:00, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

✅  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 23:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Edit request (2)
Axl Rose has a 5-octave vocal range, not three. For evidence, I have the same sources that were used in the following pages: Mike Patton, Corey Taylor, Christina Aguilera, Serj Tankian, David Bowie. Please change the category "Singers with a three-octave vocal range" to "Singers with a five-octave vocal range"

Source One Source Two [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/05/20/top-artists-vocal-range_n_5357698.html? Source Three]

If you don't consider these sources do be legit, you should remove the information from the forenamed pages as well. The first time I asked to edit the page, you ignored and deleted my request with no response or explanation. — Username228 (talk)


 * Yes check.svg Done. And you should not say stuff like "the first time I asked you..." because I was never asked by you as Wikipedia is a collaborative writing project and you should be grateful for the fact that these users are taking time to help you and others. &mdash;Skyllfully (talk &#124; contribs) 18:56, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Skyllfully, it seems you forgot to add the offered references. Without sources, the category is likely to be removed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * there were no references supporting the "three-octave" category so why would we need them now. Either way, in my edit summary, I referred to this edit request so people can see why I added the info. &mdash;Skyllfully (talk &#124; contribs) 23:14, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" – WP:EXCEPTIONAL & Carl Sagan. The German Wikipedia accepts sources in edit summaries (de:Wikipedia:Belege), but I'm not aware of a similar practice here. I'm not trying to be difficult, but I have occasionally removed such categories if they were unsupported in the article. Including the sources in the article will avoid future disputes. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 23:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2016
---My entries that are factual and in a concise timeline keep getting removed by "Prayer for the Wild at Heart".

For example, "Prayer for the wild at heart" completely removed that Axl Rose will be touring with AC/DC for NO REASON. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Axl_Rose&diff=716317703&oldid=716278821 "Rose joined AC/DC in April 2016 to perform as lead singer for the remainder of the band's Rock or Bust World Tour, after long-time lead vocalist Brian Johnson had to stop touring due to hearing problems. "

"Prayer for the wild at heart" is using a unauthorized biography as a source where the author guesses at a settlement. That is not factual or relevant. On April 18, Mick Wall apologized about his Axl Rose biography. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mick_Wall2016 "Sorry I squeezed all of the peace, love and understanding out of the book. I’d just had a heart attack, was angry at the world, thought I was about to check out and rather than reach for the light, I blew out the candles then sat there in the dark mouldering. I’m not like that anymore."

____"Prayer for the wild at heart" is making fun of Axl's ex-guitarist and calling his band "NuGN'R" which among fans is a known insult to the band. "hanks. I don't pay much attention to NuGN'R. For a long time I thought DJ Ashba was an actual DJ." - "Prayer for the wild at heart" https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Prayer_for_the_wild_at_heart&diff=prev&oldid=716041754

____ I can back up all the claims in my correction which shows this timeline: ++++The Rose and Seymour allegations happened at a holiday/Christmas party in December 1992 and they were engaged in February 1993.++++

"Everly launched the suit after being subpoenaed in a court action by Rose's former girlfriend, model Stephanie Seymour." "Nevertheless, the couple, who had been dating since 1991 and living together for about three months, became engaged, Rose claims, the following Feb. 4, only to break up three weeks later when Rose accused her of infidelity. Subsequently engaged to publisher Peter Brant, 47, Seymour gave birth to Brant's son in December." "Rose's camp believes Everly is pressing the suit for monetary gain" http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20103471,00.html

September 13, 1993, People Magazine "That's when Stephanie organized a yuletide party for Axl and several dozen friends and relatives at his Malibu home. According to Bailey, the two had been bickering and Axl, preferring to be alone, asked the guests to leave around midnight. Seymour was in a more festive mood. After she reportedly called him a name, a 45-minute brawl ensued during which Seymour allegedly swung a chair at Axl, just grazing the singer, then connected with a fist to the groin. "I never saw Axl strike, punch or slap her," Bailey says of her brother, who is renowned for his explosive temper. "[Stephanie] wants to push things to the edge." http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20106238,00.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Axl_Rose&diff=716363221&oldid=716319267

--"Prayer for the wild at heart" keeps removing the information that Axl Rose was topped a list of the greatest singers to which he gave a quote to Spin Magazine about his favorite singers. "Prayer for the wild at heart" removed the context after I restored the context and the quote. The quote was put back but has no context.

--"Prayer for the wild at heart" removed that Angus Young jammed with Axl Rose and Guns N' Roses. This is relevant to Axl Rose because he is going to be touring with Angus Young. This is Axl Rose news since Angus showed up for him.

-"Prayer for the wild at heart" is inserting their point of view into the new events, the facts are "Axl Rose, Slash, Duff McKagan reunited with the guitarist for the Not in This Lifetime... Tour" not as they put "After years of public animosity with Slash, Rose reunited with the guitarist". The story is the classic lineup reunited not that Slash and Axl made-up which happened at least a year ago.

"Guns N' Roses has confirmed its upcoming reunion performances at Coachella with members of the band's classic lineup Axl Rose, Slash and Duff McKagan." http://www.billboard.com/articles/columns/rock/6835243/axl-rose-slash-duff-mckagan-confirmed-guns-n-roses-coachella

Three years later, after being subpoenaed by Stephanie Seymour, Everly sued Rose for alleged physical and emotional abuse, which she said she had suffered throughout their relationship.[94] Rose paid an undisclosed sum to settle the case out of court.[12]

By mid-1991, Rose had become involved in a highly publicized relationship with model Stephanie Seymour. During their relationship, Seymour appeared in the music videos for "Don't Cry" and "November Rain". He became deeply attached to her young son and tried to be a good father figure for the child, as there had been none in his own life. Rose ended the relationship upon learning of an affair Seymour had started which resulted in the birth of a son later that year. That following August, Rose filed a lawsuit against Seymour, claiming that she had "kicked and grabbed" him during an incident at their Malibu home, and that she refused to return more than $100,000 worth of jewelry (including an engagement ring) he had given her as gifts. Seymour counter-sued in October, contending that Rose had assaulted her, and admitted to grabbing his scrotum only as a defensive measure. Neither side filed criminal charges after that incident in December ’92 and the couple became engaged shortly after in February ’93. Both cases were settled out of court.

In 2014, an article in People Magazine posted an article citing a pictograph measured the vocal range of over 70 famous singers from a variety of eras and styles which named Axl Rose the greatest vocalist of all time. Rose told Spin Magazine, "If I had to say who I thought the best singers were, I'd say first that I don't know there's a definitive answer as in my opinion it's subjective, and second that my focus is primarily rock singers," "That said, I enjoy Freddie Mercury, Elvis Presley, Paul McCartney, [Nazareth singer] Dan McCafferty, Janis Joplin, Michael Jackson, Elton John, Roger Daltrey, Don Henley, [Electric Light Orchestra frontman] Jeff Lynne, Johnny Cash, Frank Sinatra, [jazz singer] Jimmy Scott, Etta James, Fiona Apple, [Pretenders frontwoman] Chrissie Hynde, Stevie Wonder, James Brown and a ton of others (predominantly Seventies rock singers) and would rather hear any of them anytime rather than me!"

Angus Young joined Axl Rose onstage when Guns N' Roses headlined Coachella on April 16, 2016. The guest appearance of Angus in his uniform no less was the third time ever Young has jammed outside his band since 1977 and one time was a reluctant performance with The Rolling Stones.

"Axl Rose, Slash, Duff McKagan reunited with the guitarist for the Not in This Lifetime... Tour"

Itsaperfectday (talk) 15:23, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Sam Sailor Talk! 16:10, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Personal life
Please stop inserting allegations of adultery. Wikipedia is not a gossip rag and we must abide by WP:BLP. How can you possibly think that it is acceptable to include allegations of homewrecking or being an "unfit" mother in her current marriage? If you want to include Rose's case being settled, you need to provide a source. Seymour's financial settlement was reported by Parade as included in Davis (2008). Please stop removing it without reason. Lastly, Concert Hotels is a travel website, according to People, not an authority on the "best singer of all time". There is no reason to include their "study". Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 09:02, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I am also very concerned about excessive personal details, gossip, and allegations being included here. Rose is notable for his musical career, not for his personal life, and we should keep it concise and dispassionate. -- Laser brain  (talk)  13:43, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Stop removing the context of Axl Rose's quote, that was in response to that study that People Magazine ran an article on. http://www.people.com/article/axl-rose-greatest-vocalist-ever Itsaperfectday (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

I never used the word "adultery" The New York Times is NOT a gossip site, they quotes are in court documents related to Seymour being sued. "He (Peter Brant) contended she cheated on him and abused drugs and alcohol." "That relationship ended badly in 1993 after he (Axl Rose) accused her of infidelity." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/fashion/22Brant.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 Itsaperfectday (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

It was only reported that is a speculated amount which is not factual, it is an opinion and doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Parade is a gossip rag on par with The National Enquirer. It was an undisclosed settlement and anyone's guess is not relevant. Itsaperfectday (talk) 15:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I have explained to you why the Concert Hotel "study" should go. Please stop inserting it. It is irrelevant whether you used that specific word; you included the allegation that she cheated on him with a married man, and worse, you presented it as fact, rather than Rose's claim. That is not acceptable information to include in a biography of a living person. Parade is not a gossip magazine and their report was based on an insurance company payout. I am fine with not including the amount; the point is that Rose settled. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

"Parade is a USA magazine covering People and Gossip". Altho we came to an agreement I just to be clear this is a known fact that Parade is a gossip magazine.http://www.mondotimes.com/2/topics/5/86/4338 Itsaperfectday (talk) 21:47, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I don't think Prayer for the wild at heart" is sincere in helping make this a better page. Here they are making fun of Axl's ex-guitarist and calling his band "NuGN'R" which among fans is a known insult to the band. "Thanks. I don't pay much attention to NuGN'R" Prayer_for_the_wild_at_heart&diff=prev&oldid=716041754


 * One of the core pillars of Wikipedia is to treat other editors with civility and respect, and that includes assuming good faith. Making a baseless accusation that does not have the article's best interests in mind is, frankly, a personal insult and will not be tolerated here. Comment on the edit, not the editor. -- Laser brain   (talk)  13:55, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I respect what you are saying but it wasn't baseless, Prayer_for_the_wild_at_heart removed positive information I listed and references such as People Magazine's article on Axl Rose being named the greatest vocalist and AC/DC hiring Axl Rose as their lead singer. A further investigation shows Prayer_for_the_wild_at_heart removed all the Guns N' Rose records from guitarist Izzy Stradlin's discography when he has the most number of song credits than any member of that band. Would you consider that vandalism?


 * "Positive information" is a subjective term. As editors, we have to decide what is and is not appropriate to include in an encyclopedia article, considering things like tone, balance, and WP:BLP policy. When there is disagreement, you're expected to discuss and gain consensus without turning the article into a battleground. WP:BRD is good reading. Make a bold edit. If it's reverted, discuss it. Don't keep making the edit. Regarding Izzy, I don't know what you're referring to. The discography at Izzy Stradlin is correctly focused on his solo material. The link to Izzy Stradlin discography includes his expanded appearances in other projects. I used this same approach at Steve Lukather, a Featured article I wrote. His solo albums are there with a link to Toto's discography which doesn't need to be listed out on that page. -- Laser brain  (talk)  14:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I shouldn't have said "positive information", I should have said "neutral information of interest". I see your other point so I added "Solo studio albums" to the Izzy Stradlin page to make it clear. Thank you. Itsaperfectday (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Wait, you trawl my talk page discussions from five years ago, notice a comment from another editor who informed me that he had (correctly) removed Stradlin's GN'R records, and then you indirectly accuse me of vandalism? I have also never removed the content about Rose joining AC/DC, but you don't seem to read too carefully in your haste to attack my edits. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 14:45, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Here's where you wiped out that I had added that Axl Rose will be joining AC/DC on tour. And you also changed something to your "point of view". The article doesn't say "public animosity". https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Axl_Rose&diff=715999611&oldid=715999155 Itsaperfectday (talk) 18:50, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

I made 2 changes to the Izzy Stradlin page. I added a link to his work with Guns N' Rose and "Studio Solo Albums" so it was clearer. As far as that discussion topic, let's discuss. Please tell me why you used the term "NuGN'R" and what the meaning is?


 * 1) Read the revision you linked to again. Carefully. 2) Per Rolling Stone: How exactly did Axl and Slash mend their relationship? Axl Rose made it abundantly clear in nearly every interview he granted over the past two decades that a reunion with Slash — who he once deemed a "cancer" — was a non-starter. This is a biography of Axl Rose and his personal relationship with Slash is relevant now that they have reunited. If you find the source lacking, I will add another. 3) If you continue to violate WP:BLP I will report you at WP:ANI. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 09:35, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Accusations of infidelity
Singer Axl Rose briefly dated model Stephanie Seymour in the 1990s. Opinions are needed on whether or not the article should include any variation of the following regarding their breakup:

1. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Axl_Rose&oldid=716002456#Relationships "Seymour's infidelity lead to a break-up of her lover's marriage of 23 years that included 5 kids. Regarding her current marriage and the 22 year age difference, “Stephanie was searching for a father figure". Notoriously, Seymour was only 15 when she dated and subsequently moved in with her 41 year old modeling agent John Casablanca. In 2009, the couple's divorce proceedings revealed her being violent and her husband called her an "unfit mother" also claiming infidelity as the cause of divorce in a deposition."]

2. "Rose ended the relationship upon learning of an affair Seymour had started which resulted in the birth of a son later that year." (EDIT: To clarify, the child was born 10 months later; there was no overlap between the relationship and the pregnancy.)

3. "Rose ended the relationship shortly after amid accusing her of infidelity and by December 1993, Seymour gave birth to a son with someone else."

07:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Oppose inclusion of 1, 2 and 3, per WP:BLP, specifically WP:PUBLICFIGURE. EDIT: There is nothing "noteworthy, relevant, or important", per the policy, about the allegation. A rockstar, who has professed that he doesn't believe in monogamy (for himself), accuses the woman who left him of cheating. Her child was born 10 months after they broke up. I don't see the encyclopedic relevance. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 07:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Include something along these lines. Not sure how "PublicFigure" would counsel against it -- the sources cited include the NY Times.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 08:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Comment Regardless of the outcome of this particular RfC, Wikipedia cannot use salacious details of gossip gleaned from any source. We are an encylopedia, not a tabloid newspaper. --John (talk) 17:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * 2 at the absolute most Wikipedia is so often abused by editors who confuse an encyclopedia with a celebrity gossip magazine as to verge on making WP:BLP a dead letter for "celebrities." The material is purely the stuff of tabloids, and I am actually ashamed to see anyone saying that all the dirt we can find belongs in every BLP or the like. #1 is an absolutely horrendous violation of WP:BLP as it makes claims unrelated to the subject of the BLP. #3 is ludicrous as it says "someone else" which is a totally unwarranted claim in any BLP.  Recall that all claims about Seymour must be considered to be about her under WP:BLP.  Collect (talk) 12:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose any such inclusion. We are not a celebrity gossip magazine, we are an encyclopedia. None of this is in any way relevant to Rose's notability. -- Laser brain  (talk)  12:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Infidelity is common and not encyclopedic.  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 17:51, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note Entire "relationships" celebrity gossip section now removed, noting a required affirmative consensus for restoration seems quite unlikely bearing in mind the discussion above, and the statement of an admin here. Collect (talk) 13:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm glad my RfC supports the removal of the infidelity allegation, but there is no consensus to remove the entire section. A marriage, however brief, is not "celebrity gossip". Domestic abuse lawsuits are not "celebrity gossip". These are notable events in the subject's biography, and have influenced and affected his career. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 14:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I consider such tidbits as
 * "Everly later said that Rose had shown up at her house the previous day with a gun in his car and told her that he would kill himself if she did not marry him" and
 * "She suffered a miscarriage the following October, which deeply affected Rose, who had wanted to start a family"
 * " Everly sued Rose for alleged physical and emotional abuse, which she said she had suffered throughout their relationship" and
 * "Rose was rumored to be dating pop singer Lana Del Rey in April 2012"
 * to also fall clearly into the category of celebrity gossip entirely. As a result, it would require an affirmative consensus to place such stuff back into a BLP which also affects Seymour, Everly and Del Ray. Collect (talk) 14:18, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * How are allegations of domestic abuse "celebrity gossip"?! Jesus, I'm out. Prayer for the wild at heart (talk) 14:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - 1, 2, and 3. This information lacks significance and reads like a tabloid. Meatsgains (talk) 02:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose all, per obvious reasons already stated above. Same as we wouldn't include allegations of anything else, be it infidelity or being a secret transvestite. WP:NOT is clear enough. Had his actions resulted in significant alterations to his life and subsequent reliable coverage, that would be a different story. As for 's comments: the way they are written they constitute gossip based on testimony that has no way of being verified. As such it cannot be included unless there are reliable sources that do corroborate the events "have influenced and affected his career", as you stated. If unable to provide said evidence per WP:BLP it cannot be used; there's not much room for interpretation. Best, FoCuS contribs ;  talk to me!  13:07, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose inclusion of all three points; not encyclopedically relevant, at least to the extent of engaging in this manner of "he-said/she-said" analysis. At present Seymour is already mentioned in connection with the (frankly repulsive and unconscionable) decision to include a Manson-authored track on an album, and I think that provides the reader with plenty of insight as to how well the relationship worked out without the need to go into unverifiable recriminations between the parties.  S n o w  let's rap 21:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2016
The first section states Guns and Roses first album was Appetite for destruction, and their second album was Use your illusion 1 & 2. Below is the correct information. 1st album: 1986 Guns N' Roses debuts with a live EP, Live ?!*@ Like Suicide, issued in a limited pressing of 10,000 copies on its own Suicide label. 2nd Album: 1987 Guns and Roses first Full length studio album Appetite for destruction. 3rd Album: 1988 GN'R Lies is issued. It consists of four acoustic songs and the group's previously issued four-song live EP. 4th & 5th Albums: 1991 Use Your Illusion I and Use Your Illusion 2 are released simultaneously.

108.207.63.160 (talk) 10:19, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * The query then is whether an EP is the same as an "album" as such, and whether variants of such should be listed specifically as albums. As the term applied to the albums you wish to add is generally "EP", it is unlikely that this edit would be made. Collect (talk) 11:42, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


 * This is more of a G'N'R related discussion that should be held on the discography page of the band. The live EP is not an album, and Lies is a compilation. The article states the main studio albums, nothing else is needed as it would be duplication. Karst (talk) 11:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Overweight Axl
recently inserted a large section into the article about Rose being overweight and various memes and litigation stemming from it. I removed it, saying it's irrelevant to Rose's notability and not encyclopedic. They have decided to disregard WP:BRD and insert the information again, so I'm asking for discussion and consensus here. I do not believe this information belongs in an encyclopedia article. As with the closed RFC above, we are not a tabloid here to report on personal issues. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:59, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was delayed in posting; my comments are below. The fact that Rose is overweight in the pictures is irrelevant to the article but totally relevant to Rose's issuance of the takedown notices.  In fact, I'd agree that the "overweight Axl" part of the story wouldn't have any reason to be posted if Rose himself hadn't made it an issue.  But he did, by taking a legal action related to it that was widely reported by reputable sites.  Thus, it belongs in the article, as I discuss below. - AyaK (talk) 00:23, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I am just trying to point out that ground breaking news was not deemed relevant but it was about his career.

I had discussed this on AyaK's page. I will move comments to suggested talk here.

How is a bad picture a news story that isn't tabloid journalism? How does this belong in his biography if Beyonce's page here also doesn't mention her actions to take down a picture that was used to bully her? It simply isn't noteworthy when a celebrity is forced to defend themselves from slander. Barbara Streisand actually sued.

Upon doing a search for that concert, it was revealed that this 6 year old picture did not represent how he looked overall that night. Axl didn't look overweight in the other photos in 2010 and the 2010 tour of Guns N' Roses and his shirt was open in some of the pictures. A bad picture can exist but to make it seem like it was reality is another thing, it should not be passed for a true representation of how he looked because it isn't accurate and was due to the widening of the face of a cameras lenses. There are plenty of stories that show a telephoto lens makes one's face wider. 

Also AyaK claiming he is a "frequent litigant" falls under opinion. I see AyaK has a discussion on his talk page about "frequent litigant" but I don't think it applies here or certainly not in this news story. This is an opinion and this story is not about a lawsuit nor deserving of a whole dissertation. A person has a right to project their true image especially if the picture was not his look at the time.

AyaK had changed back the edit altho I did address it on his talk page with no response. This is not a notable story to his career just because it was repeated. It's not interesting or relevant to anything important.

In recent years, Axl has been in the news for inspiring a fashion collection shown in a fashion show and also when famous people have dressed as him on Halloween. These topics are not relevant either. If he bid on an apartment and didn't get it because he was a musician and that makes news, would we put that in at all especially the section of what he is working on? No, we would not. I have to argue that just because a story gets pickup that does not mean it is relevant and anything can make the news.

The same writer and news source that ran the story with the unflattering photos just ran a story about singer Robbie Williams sampling his wife's breast milk. Is this tabloid journalism belong in his wikipedia? No.

It was big news when Angus Young joined Axl Rose on stage at Coachella and my edit about that event was removed. If even that is not relevant then the page is going for more notable events and career moments. surprised fans when he took the stage with Axl and Guns N' Roses at Coachella 2016.] Itsaperfectday (talk) 17:09, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

News stories about Rose
I added a section to the Axl Rose article yesterday arising from news stories that I saw in Time, Billboard and Yahoo about DMCA copyright letters resulting from a seemingly frivolous copyright claim filed on behalf of Rose. Today, that section was deleted, and I received a note from an editor named "Laser brain" that read as follows:

"Hello, consensus at Talk:Axl Rose has consistently been against including "tabloid" journalism about Rose that doesn't relate to his career or notability. Please discuss there and gain consensus if you want to include such information. --Laser brain (talk) 11:33, 8 June 2016 (UTC)"

Since cites in publications such as Time and Billboard are unquestionably relevant to Rose's notability and are not about tabloid matters such as Rose's alleged sexual relationships, I reverted the edit. However, I do agree with this editor that this is a topic to discuss on the Talk page. From reading through the article, it seems that Rose has an extensive litigation history. Is there something about Rose that makes such litigiousness NOT notable? If not, should there be a separate section of the article that discusses Rose's continual legal issues, because these seem notable in their own right. - AyaK (talk) 00:17, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I think a section on his overall litigiousness would be appropriate if it is over and above that of a typical celebrity. That's not my reading of the sources you provide, though. I get the impression that most celebrities are lawsuit-happy when it comes to their public image. I didn't mean to imply that your sources are tabloids, only that this is the kind of coverage I'd expect to see in a tabloid. We should be focused on his musicianship. -- Laser brain  (talk)  00:38, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I don't agree, but the two of us have made our positions clear. As I've said, my opinion is that if a celebrity's legal actions are notable enough to be widely covered by the mainstream media, they're notable enough to be in Wikipedia. As you've said, you disagree.  What do others think? - AyaK (talk) 01:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I see no one else has responded. Basically, my position is that we're not covering this story because it deals with Axl Rose as a person instead of as a musician, and I simply don't think that's a sufficient objection to omit a notable story.  Maybe we should do the same edits removing personal life issues to the articles about, say, Woody Allen and Alan Turing.  After all, Allen is a significant writer and director, and Turing was a significant mathematician and computer scientist.  Shouldn't we be focusing on their achievements instead of their personal lives?  However, perhaps I'm oversimplifying the view from that side, which is why I'd like to hear from other editors.  In the meantime, here are some of the articles on other reputable sites taking note of this action by Rose:  CNN; People; Washington Post; The Guardian; Rolling Stone.  To me, this is a perfect example of the "Streisand effect" -- drawing attention to something not notable in itself by taking legal action against it.  The question in this article can be reduced to whether we want to make personal life events off-limits on Wiki, as legal notices cannot be conflated with gossip. - AyaK (talk) 06:09, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It's usually best to allow a few days, as not everyone stops by Wikipedia daily. I'm coming around to seeing your point, though, owing to the sheer number of incidents and secondary sources about them. I still don't care for having separate sections about personal life incidents—a section about the overweight photo seems like undue detail. I'd rather work relevant incidents into the normal flow of prose as appropriate. A good exemplar of how we should treat musician articles, in my opinion, is Steve Lukather, a Featured article (meaning it has been through a thorough content vetting process). You'll note that his career and musical style are thoroughly covered, but we don't include undue detail about his personal life and there is no "Personal life" section. -- Laser brain  (talk)  11:21, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * This IMHO is a tricky one. All the above articles are based upon this article on TorrentFreak. We need to look into the reliability of that source and see if other publications have done their own investigation. For the sake of balance it needs a comment from Rose representatives (not Web Sheriff). Karst (talk) 11:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The DCMA takedown notices are easy enough to verify; look at the Lumen database and you'll find 11 notices at the top. The reaction from the Winnipeg Free Press, which published the article that the pictures come from, is included in the Billboard article and may be in others, but I haven't searched for it.  However, I do agree with Laser brain's current position that these events should be included in the article instead of being set out in a separate section; all of the rest of Rose's litigation is included in the article, and this really isn't any different.  In addition, I dropped the "frequent litigant" sentence that I'd put in the blurb; although there is support for that, and I look upon Rose as a continual litigant, that's still a statement of opinion.  The article provides enough information for people to either reach that conclusion or disagree with it.  So that sentence has gone. But I disagree that we need a comment from Rose's representatives; the actions speak for themselves. If they make a comment, we can include it then.  Anyway, I reworked the discussion, including a later-published discussion of the Streisand effect resulting from these actions, and reposted it in the article as described herein.  See what you think now.- AyaK (talk) 16:50, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, the Billboard article is good. They have at least done some of their own research. This is more 'cease and desist' than actual litigation, and US based. They're obviously not touching Canadian copyright law. Any journalist worth their salt would phone the artist representatives. For balance it needs a comment there, unless the Websheriff people went rogue on this one. Karst (talk) 09:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not happy about editors deciding to continue edit warring about this while the conversation is going. You are expected to join the discussion instead of continuing to undo other people's edits. Edit warring is poor form, even if you think you're right. -- Laser brain  (talk)  16:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I responded above as this topic seems to be in two sections. AyaK claiming he is a "frequent litigant" falls under opinion. I see AyaK has a discussion on his talk page about "frequent litigant" but I don't think it applies here or certainly not in this news story. This is an opinion and this story is not about a lawsuit nor deserving of a whole dissertation. A person has a right to project their true image especially if the picture was not his look at the time. Beyonce did same and her story is not on her Wikipedia page. It was her right to protect her true image when she played the half-time show at 2013 Super Bowl.

Upon doing a search for that concert, it was revealed that this 6 year old picture did not represent how he looked overall that night. Axl didn't look overweight in the other photos in 2010 and the 2010 tour of Guns N' Roses and his shirt was open in some of the pictures. A bad picture can exist but to make it seem like it was reality is another thing, it should not be passed for a true representation of how he looked because it isn't accurate and was due to the widening of the face of a cameras lenses. There are plenty of stories that show a telephoto lens makes one's face wider. 

There is quite a difference between what makes news in online versions of magazines and in their print versions. Anyone can attach their name to a celebrity online or add an agenda. A celebrity protecting their image is behind the scenes business that might get leaked but in no way belongs in their biography under what they are working on and their artistic accomplishments. If we include all these tabloid stories then these pages would be full of trivia that would get equal space with their accomplishments. Itsaperfectday (talk) 17:32, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have no real interest in Axl Rose; although I know who the guy is, I couldn't recognize a photo of him (which shows how long ago I worked in the music business). However, this debate seems to have devolved into fanboyism.  Unlike the commenter above, I have no interest in whether the picture in the Winnipeg Free Press actually captured how he looked that night; what I care about is the fact is that he doesn't own the copyright to the photo and yet (through his reps) he falsely claimed he did in an effort to remove the photo from the Internet.  The rest of you can decide whether you want to continue to sanitize that story from his Wiki page.  I have nothing more to contribute, so I'm done. - AyaK (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Piano playing
Something that I think has gone totally unnoticed so far is Rose's piano playing. Rose is well known for writing many songs on the piano, including November Rain, 14 Years and Estranged. He also tends to play the piano for November Rain in live appearances as well. He's not much of a pianist, but if Rose had an instrument of choice, it would be the piano. He has a very percussive approach to playing the piano, something akin to Elton John hammering on the ivories.

"I've been playing piano my whole life. I took lessons, but I only really played my lesson on the day of the lesson. All week long, I'd sit down at the piano and just make up stuff. To this day, I still can't really play other people's songs, only my own. I haven't had a piano for years. I couldn't afford one. I couldn't figure out where I was sleeping at night, let alone try to have a place for a piano. So I had to put it aside and have the dream that I'd get into it. Now I really want to bring the piano out." - Rose to Rolling Stone

--Frozen Jese (talk) 20:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that does warrant inclusion in the article, with reliable sources of course,  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 20:12, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 August 2016
Please edit the background information card so that piano is included in the instruments section beside vocals. A reliable source is the page itself as it says Axl Rose has studied piano.

5.55.51.227 (talk) 14:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia cannot be used to cite itself. Topher385 (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Violence, racism and homophobia
I don't understand why there isn't even one word about his violence and extreme abuse towards women. http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20103471,00.html In addition he had racist and homophobic lyrics and remarks. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/lists/50-wildest-guns-n-roses-moments-20151124/august-1989-one-in-a-million-shocks-the-world-with-racist-homophobic-slurs-20151119 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.27.106.33 (talk) 20:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Extreme abuse is pushing a certain point of view. The legal issues are outlined in the article. The People.com section appears to be gossip. The Rolling Stone article appears to sensationalise aspects of Rose's life. However, it is considered to be a WP:RS so merits inclusion of some kind. Karst (talk) 13:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The post posits that Rose is "homophobic" and has physically and criminally attacked women. Such an allegation is contentious, and, absent a strong reliable source, does not belong on any BLP or page at all.   In short, I consider the comments to violate WP:BLP in esse. Collect (talk) 14:16, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The comments on him being homophobic are in reference to the song "One in a Million" that has a section in the article. They include his response denying the allegations. Other then that, I continue to fully support the removal of the Seymour section in April (a serious BLP issue). But it now seems as if any aspect of his perosnal life is off limits. For instance, there is no mention of his short marriage to Erin Everly. Karst (talk) 14:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
 * The article does already mention the racism/homophobia controversy that surrounded "One in a Million". But the reality is that apart from that one song — in which it was never really all that clear that he was actually expressing his own personal views about people of colour or LGBTs, rather than simply writing from the fictional perspective of a crusty and biased character — there's no other known evidence of Rose harbouring racist or homophobic views. And when it comes to violence against women, all we have is unconfirmed allegations that have never, to my knowledge, been properly adjudicated in a court of law — Stephanie Seymour's lawsuit alleging abuse, for example, was filed simultaneously with a countersuit by Rose alleging that Seymour had been physically abusive to him. All of which means none of this is properly verifiable. We're not the town stocks, and do not exist as a venue for attacking people for things they may have done — we have to comply with WP:BLP, which requires us to be very careful when it comes to contentious claims about the behaviour of living people, and there's just not enough quality sourcing out there for us to properly do what you want. Bearcat (talk) 18:46, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Axl Rose. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120311211209/http://www.chopaway.com/viewtopic.php?id=555 to http://www.chopaway.com/viewtopic.php?id=555

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:35, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

personal life section
Okay, it's kind of ridiculous that the entire section was removed, and apparently there has to be a discussion to reinsert it, so here it is.

What do people think about this reinsertion? RF23 (talk) 14:43, 23 January 2017 (UTC)


 * The sources remain the same as per the previous RfC and discussion. Asking to comment as he was the last to remove the section. Karst (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I thought the issue was with the content, not the sources? And if it's People.com that's the issue, that can be removed anyways, it's mostly sourced from the other sources, wich are interviews with or books about Axl.RF23 (talk) 14:55, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I would not object to the inclusion of the Everly or Seymour aspect per se, as they are both notable. But I think it would be better placed in the text, as opposed to having a personal life section. Having that has caused all sorts of problems in the past (this is how it looked prior to the RfC). Karst (talk) 15:06, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, consensus was to remove these things as the section became a dumping ground for celebrity gossip ("OMG Axl is fat now!" etc) and is not relevant to his notability. Even the language you propose above ("The couple broke up") is grocery store check-out aisle material and not encyclopedia material. I could live with concise text describing his marriages, working in naturally in his biography. I am absolutely against a separate "relationships" or "personal life" section because it attracts too much garbage. -- Laser brain  (talk)  15:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Instruments
He plays guitar too. Dead Horse, One in a Million etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.145.180.215 (talk) 21:23, 1 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Did someone say he didn't ? -  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 21:57, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Axl Rose. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111031183629/http://hem.passagen.se/snoqalf/art-1998-geffen.html to http://hem.passagen.se/snoqalf/art-1998-geffen.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050921111303/http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=29388 to http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Article&newsitemID=29388
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721020055/http://muzyka.interia.pl/wiadomosc_dnia/news/wiadomosc%2C536468 to http://muzyka.interia.pl/wiadomosc_dnia/news/wiadomosc%2C536468

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:54, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 July 2017
Please change discography for Axl Rose To mention the EP released by Guns N' Roses on the Uzi Suicide label in 1986; This is omitted in the current page form. The EP has a wiki page to link to in your entry. Randyorobertsii (talk) 22:04, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Artist articles for members of a band generally only list significant releases, not every single, EP, live album, etc., and then link to the band's discography article.  This article follows that, and the link to the Guns N' Roses discography article leads to an EP section that includes this release.  The information is already available, and there isn't any reason offered why this one EP is more significant than any other EP or single release. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * The following was originally posted at User_talk:Eggishorn and copied here to ensure clarity. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hey EggisHorn,


 * I submitted a request to add the Ep Live like a suicide to Axl Roses page. You said the album was not important enough as to require a mention. However starting here on Wikipedia I edit things I know for sure;so i do not give false info. The EP Live like a suicide was the GNR demo tape that got them signed on Geffen records. The band then took their advance from the label and published the demo themselves with a dubbing of live crowd, hence the live in the title. The EP was so successful and rare the EP started sell for over 300 dollars in 1987 money. The band then realizing how well the public received the EP release the Live like a suicide records and 4 new acoustic tracks as the second major Record release GNR Lies following Appetite for destruction. So i feel the success of the EP and importance of the EP in the history of the band warrants the edit I suggested the edit so people can know and understand the band's history a little better.


 * Thank you, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randyorobertsii (talk • contribs) 10:36, July 30, 2017 (UTC)
 * , From your description, it sounds like the EP is a notable one and we do actually have an article about it: Live ?!*@ Like a Suicide. The problem with both your original edit request and your follow-up is that, as far as I can tell, you are speaking form your personal knowledge.  You say you "do not give false info," which is certainly a laudable goal in any encyclopedia.  Unfortunately, your good intentions are not good enough for the projects standards on what information is included or not.  You can find a better explanation of what I'm saying at this essay titled Verifiability, not Truth.  The short version is that we need a reliable source that any other reader or editor can use to verify the information you want included.  At this time, I don't see anything that would qualify for inclusion here.  Thanks for understanding.  Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:19, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Axl Rose. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110612032002/http://www.guitarworld.com/last_gigs_slash_with_guns_n039_roses to http://www.guitarworld.com/last_gigs_slash_with_guns_n039_roses

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Politics
A politics section was previously removed by a single user under the guise that it was not relevant to Rose's "overall (decidedly non-political) life and career ". I disagree strongly with Rose's career being non-political, especially now. He's written political songs such as Civil War and chinese Democracy, amongst others, and his twitter account is almost entirely dedicated to politics, has recieved press on mainstream sites over his politics. I think the section should be put back in, at least in some form.RF23 (talk) 23:42, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Amy Bailey: Sister or Half-sister?
As it stands now, the article refers to Amy as his "sister," in contrast to Stuart, who is specifically referred to as his "half-brother." However, while I've seen some sources implying that she is his full biological sister, many others seem to indicate that Amy is actually his half-sister. The fact that she has the last name "Bailey" doesn't really help, since Axl (albeit temporarily) took that surname as well, when his stepfather adopted him. It sounded like Axl's biological father was out of the picture fairly early, so it almost doesn't seem tenable that he would've fathered another child with Axl's mother, but I can't be too sure.

So, which one is she?? RockNWrite82 (talk) 04:32, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Axl never worked at tower records
Hi Axl never worked at tower records on sunset Blvd. he briefly worked at tower video which was on the other side of the street. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.77.195.90 (talk) 22:11, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Keyboards
He most certainly did play the synthesizer on at least Paradise City and November Rain, also piano on the latter. I think it's worth including keyboards for his instruments if only for those two important songs, probably there are others too, at least live before Dizzy Reed joined. Rantalaiho74 (talk) 03:29, 4 April 2020 (UTC)


 * We don't list keyboards because of the instructions found at Template:Infobox_musical_artist, which says don't list every instrument the artist has played, just the main ones. Binksternet (talk) 04:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I think piano should be included. He's as much a pianist as Alicia Keys, Lady Gaga or Taylor Swift are, who all have it listed in their infoboxes. He composes most of his songs on piano, plays piano on one of their biggest hits (November Rain- which has a music video predominantly showing Rose playing piano that has over a billion views), plays piano at every GNR concert for multiple songs (despite the band having two other dediacted keyboardists), as well as plays piano and keys on the majority of multiple Guns N' Roses albums. We shouldn't include for example guitar, because he only plays guitar on two or three songs, but on at least 14 GNR songs Rose plays piano.RF23 (talk) 01:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Update infobox photo?
I've changed the infobox photo to a recent picture but that got reversed with a comment "No consensus". What needs to be done to agree the change? Or can someone explain what's wrong with these images? Kreepin Deth (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * that pic is already used below. this one would imo be a good one --FMSky (talk) 14:23, 17 October 2022 (UTC)