Talk:Fun Lovin' Criminals

Untitled
You can nick them from DiFontaine.net Oh and sorry I didn't really mean in that way. No offence !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonynonymous (talk • contribs) 20:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Picture
Good that someone put a picture of the criminals. thank you mate. :) Sparklenova (talk) 16:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Stopping a revert war
Before this turns into full guns blazing, can the anonymous unregistered user please stop constantly undoing the edits to the External Links section? Thank you. --Stenun (talk) 20:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Major Rewrite
I've done a major rewrite of the article, cleaning it up and polishing it. I think it reads better now. I took out the information about what the various members of the band have done singly (such as Huey writing for a wine magazine) as I feel such information is better suited to the pages of the individual members of the band and not the band page itself. I also took out date information about past gigs as there is little point in including it. I'm taling a break now and will get to the rest of the article in a little while. --Stenun (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * As per my question and the answer I got here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Album_Covers, the album covers have all been removed from the article and should not be put back. --Stenun (talk) 21:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * OK when it comes to the External Links I am aware, given the revert war a few days ago and the messages that have been left on my talk page, that it is something of a touchy subject. So I am going to explain each of my edits here and I would ask that if anyone disagrees with them that you discuss it here rather than enter another revert war.
 * I'm taking out the line about the band being run through their myspace because as I said it makes it sound like the person who runs this myspace runs the band and I don't think anyone wants to claim that.
 * Given that there is no definite release from the band identifying the myspace as their official site - all the text on their albums, for example, point to other sites - I've changed the tag on this link from "Official FLC homepage" to "FLC myspace". When their album comes out later this year we can add back in the "official" tag assuming the text in the album identifies it as such.
 * Having looked at DiFontaine many times, I have to confess I can only find the forums. Therefore with the description I have reduced it to just mentioning the forums.  If I've been incredibly dense, please show me how to access all the rest of the stuff on DiFontaine and I'll add the rest of the tag back in.
 * I've taken out the GoldFunLovin links completely as one of the tags mentions it is part of DiFontaine and we already have a link to DiFontaine. Can't have two.
 * Given that we've tagged what is on DiFontaine, I've done the same to the FLCNYC link, too.
 * I've taken out the references section completely for now as there was nothing there that isn't referenced above. I know this is technically against wikipedia guidelines but it is only a temporary solution until verifiable information from an independent store.  I'll keep an eye open for any interviews, articles, etc.  If you know of any, please let me know.
 * Well that's about it. I realise some of these decisions are more than likely going to be unpopular but I ask that you keep things cool and we discuss any disagreements rather than having a repeat of a few days ago.  --Stenun (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have, once again, taken out the link to GoldFunLovin for the reason stated above. If you disagree, please discuss it here first before automatically putting it back again.  Thank you.  --Stenun (talk) 21:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Promo Negligence
We feel offended!!! If you call this flc promotion! Sorry but what are you trying to tell us : "Having looked at DiFontaine many times, I have to confess I can only find the forums." Oi we have also put an flc biography, picture thread and we have given a lot of chances to people to buy flc t shirts and many other things!!! If we administrators/moderators/members are not active any more it doesn't mean you can neglect DiFontaine.net as I told you before why. And you are all able to see everything on DiFontaine.net besides moderators/administrators panel... can't believe you have changed my friends contributions!!!!

What you are doing unless your friendly requests, is unacceptable and definitely against wikipedia. We might change it and if you change our contributions we will definitely tell the admins about it and you might be blocked for a long while. Just be a little bit more aware of things in your life!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonynonymous (talk • contribs) 20:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't call this "flc promotion", I call this an encyclopaedia. What do you call it?  --Stenun (talk) 00:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Editing this talk page
If you feel changes need to be made to the article page and stuff needs to come out, that's one thing. But a talk page should NOT be edited to remove comments left by other users. Please stop taking out my, and other people's, comments. Thank you. --Stenun (talk) 14:52, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This page is NOT about promoting the band. This is an encyclopaedia.  PLEASE stop removing other people's comments from this talk page!  --Stenun (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please read this article Talk page guidelines before making any edits to this page. It will help you understand the official policies about talk pages and removing other people's comments.  Thank you.  --Stenun (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

DiFontaine.net
As of the time of writing this comment, difontaine.net is currently down. Therefore I think it somewhat superfluous to edit the article to say there is even more there than is currently listed as as of right now there is nothing there at all. When difontaine.net comes up again, as I'm sure it will, let's revisit the subject and people can point out the parts of the site that I've apparently missed. --Stenun (talk) 17:45, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove this, or any other message from a talk page. If you feel a message is no longer relevant then please leave a reply to that effect.  For example, as I write this DiFontaine is working again, so a message to that effect is welcome.  But when I wrote the original message DiFontaine was down so the original message is accurate and therefore shouldn't be removed.  --Stenun (talk) 20:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous message
Despite my requests to the contrary, an anonymous user took out one of my comments and replaced it with this: "Msg from flc webmaster -

This is ridiculous! Weve got groupies acting like there 15 again and crazy people messing about. I will put a stop to this! I have better things to be doing with my life than sorting out a stupid war over a band that have not gigged london in years! Its a sad fact. As you know the myspace and difontaine.net will continue to bring you the updates on the band. I would like nothing to do with any other projects so please do not email me about any! This on going battle that has been made out to be difontaines fault is stupid and many people have blamed myself. I did not bring anyone into the comedy so if anyone suggests that they are LOW! This has all taken my interest from the music and the band. So i conclude with; i suggest that everyone plays game or the web sites WILL be taken down!" The users IP address is 193.63.197.246. This is not the first time they have removed other people's comments. --Stenun (talk) 18:35, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

FLC WARS
a revert war?!? promo Negligence?!? major rewrite!?! what on earth are you on about guys. nobody cares about any of this. get down to whats really important, the music and the band. FLC dont want read or here about this anymore. and who wrote the wikipedia entry for the band. it dont make FLC look good in any way. poor history researched! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skillsomega (talk • contribs) 08:37, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Things like revert wars and major rewrites are par for the course on wikipedia. It can be frustrating but you get used to it.  Most users won't see this talk page anyway, they'll just see the main article which is what I've been trying to improve for a while now.  I'm sorry you don't like it the way it currently stands but I assure you it reads a lot better than what used to be there before I rewrote it.  (For reference, the old text can be found here, I hope you agree that the body of what is there now reads better than what used to be there.)  If you feel more needs to be added then please add it!  That's what wikipedia is for, after all.  I'd love it if there was more sourced information in the article, but unfortunately I don't know any independent sources we can use as references.  If you do, please edit the article! *g*  But as I have said before, this article is not supposed to be about promoting the band, it's supposed to be an encyclopaedia article.  Therefore bigging up the band and going on about how great they are is not encouraged and will probably be removed by other editors.  But as I said, if you have access to verifiable facts and references about the bands history then please include them!  --Stenun (talk) 16:55, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Anonynonymous (talk) 20:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC) Stenun, do you have to tell everyone what exactly wikipedia is? No, of course not! Yes, indeed Skillsomega, you're right, neither the band would love to see this kind of war. I'm deep ashamed!!! :$
 * First of all, thank you for trying to correct what you thought was a spelling mistake in my previous message. However it wasn't a mistake.  "Par" is golfing terminology and was not a typo, "par for the course" meaning "the usual" or "average" or "to be expected", etc.  I have put back my message to how it originally was.  Secondly, I mentioned again that wikipedia is an encyclopaedia as a partial response to the claim that the article "dont make FLC look good in any way (sic)", the article doesn't HAVE to make FLC look good - in fact that is discouraged.  It is supposed to be an encyclopaedic, academic article.  I get the impression that some people still don't get that.  So I mentioned it again.  Thirdly, I agree that the band wouldn't love to see this kind of war but I am pretty sure that they would also not love to see the anonymous user who made the edit to the article a while back claiming to be part of their management and running the band through his myspace.  What exists right now is better than that and if I have to enter another revert war to stop such ludicrous claims from ever resurfacing again then I will.  I would hope that most people would agree with me.  --Stenun (talk) 21:08, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, you have been understood! At least I understand you. The anonymous person flc webmaster, had been quite angry with some people from flcnyc.co.uk hence why it's become a ridiculous war. Now let's stop it... it's none of my concerns and I think you neither want to care about it. The end. :) Anonynonymous (talk) 21:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think wikipedia is the place to take out your annoyance about another website. Particularly not by claiming to "run the band".  But as you say, let's leave it here and hopefully we can improve the article.  --Stenun (talk) 00:33, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

ANYBODY who claims to be part of management or otherwise are nothing more than groupies! Know your place--Skillsomega (talk) 9:20, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Shall we delete the discussion page then? I shouldn't say this, but I don't like me and my friends getting neglected. And just know no one can be a part of the flc management even though you are Jonathan Block!!! 87.209.195.148 (talk) 19:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)
 * No, discussion pages should not be deleted. --Stenun (talk) 20:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

neglected by who?!?.... again, another pointless comment, nobody cares--Skillsomega (talk) 9:20, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Erm... Aren't u Mark ?? i can see dat. wud u pleaze stop messing! after all, difontainers are getting really mad now, stenun. let this b the last message before the admns block yall. peace87.209.195.148 (talk) 18:47, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Isn't who Mark? I'm not Mark, I don't even know who you think this Mark is.  What messing do you think I've been doing?  You're the one who keeps deleting other peoples messages - you've been blocked several times now.  I don't care if "difontainers are getting really mad now", all I care about - all I've cared about from the start - is improving this article.  Stop trying to drag me into your powerplays, I'm not interested.  --Stenun (talk) 19:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I was talkin to skillsomega. that's mark! not you! 87.209.195.148 (talk) 19:19, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Your message wasn't obviously in response to anyone and contained a message directed specifically at me. Maybe you could make it clearer in future if different parts of a message are intended for different people?  --Stenun (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Edits made on other flc wikipedia pages
As you know there are many other languages here... so it's been edited (again) in french, german and dutch. I don't really understand why people make such a hassle about these edits. Come on people don't you act like hypocrites. Everyone can do whatever they want to do. The end. 192.87.49.2 (talk) 10:53, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Borovini/Borgovini
Recently, the article has been edited to change every instance of the word Borovini to Borgovini. Is the person responsible SURE that this is correct? Most of the credits I've seen in albums, etc., say Borovini but I believe it does sometimes say Borgovini instead. Is there an independent reliable source we can use for this? --Stenun (talk) 14:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Trust. That's true. It's Borgovini. We had spoken to that guy ages ago and that's what we heard from him. ;) Borovini is not an italian surname. When you google that.. it asks if you were searching for borovina. Hope that helps you. Sparklenova (talk) 19:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But you have no verifable and independent sources? --Stenun (talk) 12:49, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Hope you get to speak to that guy one day. And then you will be quite sure. And the most reliable source is him the ex flc drummer. Maybe you can find some informations from needledrop.com ?? Sparklenova (talk) 19:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Silly as it sounds, saying you've spoken to the guy doesn't count as a verifiable and independent source for the puposes of wikipedia. Look at it this way, if someone else were to come on here and claim they've spoken to the guy and he said his name was McGuffin, why should we believe you over this new guy?  Both of you are claiming to have spoken to the guy in question and both of you are using that as your only source.  See the problem?  *g*    Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying you need to source your changes - it's Borovini for the entire lifespan of the article so if you now come along and change something as basic as that then you need to provide justification for this change beyond just "I spoke to him" ...  --Stenun (talk) 09:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

"Silly as it sounds" ¬_¬ Maybe we should print his ID / passport and paste it here on wikipedia to confirm his whole identity. Nah, Steve, if you read this. Don't you feel offended. We won't do that. Promise. :)

Before you all start to get all iffy about it. Here are the other independent sources. Steve's other music... CC Jones!! http://cdbaby.com/cd/ccjones Polish site: http://www.audiostacja.pl/index.php?le=produkty&pr=produkty&kryterium=PRESONUS&numer=335&przycisk_id=324 http://www.difontaine.net/forums/viewthread.php?tid=441#pid16346 http://www.difontaine.net/forums/viewthread.php?tid=127#pid2141

I am not going to say no more... unless... Steve-O full name: Stephen Byron Borgovini aka Steve Borovini

http://www.locoweb.co.uk/steve.htm

Steve is an abbreviated form of Stephen, it's a greek name and means crown. Borovini was made up because it's simple to remember. ;) Sparklenova (talk) 18:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think you get my point. And I'm certainly not "getting all iffy about it" *g*.  If Borgovini is his real name then great, no worries.  But changing it to Borgovini when the article has for so long said otherwise AND most of the credits on the albums also say otherwise ... because of that it needs to be verified and shown by an independent source that this is his proper name.  That's all I'm saying.  This should not be taken as a personal attack or me just trying to stir up trouble *g*, I am just trying to stick to wikipedia guidelines, that's all.  If you could incorporate some of these sources into the article (the independendy sources would be better) that would be great.  :-)  --Stenun (talk) 20:16, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Changing the spelling of internal links
Changing the spelling of internal links within the article - such as was done just now to change "New York musicians" to "New York Musiciains" isn't a good idea as it breaks the link. There is no category "New York Musicians" and so the link now ended up leading nowhere. If it is left as "New York musicians" it leads to where it's supposed to. --Stenun (talk) 18:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Links removed
I've removed the link from the info box at the top that led to a fan page. The info box should only ever link to official pages and, as - stated here: - the site being linked to is not an official page. I've also removed it from the links at the bottom on the grounds that we already have two fan site links on the page and we're not even supposed to have that many, the fan sites lited on a wiki page are supposed to be there only to help the article - not to advertise the fan sites. So I've taken it out for now, pending a discussion among unbiased editors (i.e. editors not linked to any fan site) as to which we keep. --Stenun (talk) 23:42, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My vote would be that we keep the current fan sites we have and don't include the new one as the link above claims that the new site is already tied in with difontaine.net and we REALLY can't have two links to the same fan network. They should be to seperate sites so that people can get a better understanding of the band and their following.  With two different fan sites linked we provide two different perspectives.  --Stenun (talk) 23:46, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Hey everyone - I would like to add a link to a new fansite - www.thefunlovincriminals.com as it has up to date news and tour information on the band and is useful. Stenun disagrees - what does anyone else reckon?

Comments please! Sohailjuna (talk) 11:51, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Of course you want to add it, it's your site. You're hardly going to argue otherwise.  That is why I asked for comments from unbiased editors.  By putting the link back in you are breaking a wikipedia rule about linking to a site you own .  Please allow other editors to reach a consensus about the page and then one of them will make the relevant change - if it is decided that one is needed.  --Stenun (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Disbanding?
Huey Morgan has mentioned on air that the Fun Lovin' Criminals would be disbanding in September of 2014, and he didn't sound like he was joking (it wasn't April 1st either). He also didn't make it sound like an announcement, more like a reminder that there wouldn't be many more chances to see them live. Can anyone find another source on this? 129.132.62.57 (talk) 14:35, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

I don't think they're disbanding. Huey answered an email on his Radio 2 show on 20 September 2014 from a fan asking if the band would be coming back to Newcastle to perform and he said that "when they get business done" and that he even considered a 20th anniversary tour in 2016 too. Andrew07 (talk) 15:22, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for clearing that up. Maybe he just meant temporarily disbanding, as in when they're not touring or recording. On the other hand, on his Radio 2 show he regularly introduces himself as "I used to play in a band called the Fun Lovin' Criminals" now… so maybe it's just him that's leaving? 188.63.151.199 (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

Definitely not disbanding, Huey just confirmed on his 6music show today (01 October 2016) that he is going back into the studio with the FLC's to start work on a new album Andrew07 (talk) 16:08, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fun Lovin' Criminals. 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/20151222130927/http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/whats-on/music/huey-morgan-gets-ready-fun-5350893 to http://www.gethampshire.co.uk/whats-on/music/huey-morgan-gets-ready-fun-5350893

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) 15:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Questionable use of sources to classify this band as jazz
Citations five and six in the infobox and the lede are used as proof that this is a jazz band. Citation six is an article from the Chicago Tribune "Fun Lovin' Criminals living up to the name". I read the article. I did a search with Firefox. I found no reference to jazz. Instead the articles says, "Leiser's forte was keyboards and esoteric electronic music, while Morgan grew up with an affinity for the hard-core guitar blues of B.B. King and Buddy Guy. They melded these influences with the dance music their deejay pal Mateo DiFontaine was spinning and the street sounds of Manhattan's booming hip-hop scene to create a stylized hybrid that's less rap-rock and more rock-hop and soul." The writer says that their album "jumps styles without regard for continuity"—and yet jazz isn't one of those styles. The article ends by calling one of them "a true veteran of the rock 'n' roll trenches."

The second citation offered as proof that this is a jazz band is from the English newspaper The Independent. But this article doesn't say anything about jazz. It doesn't contain the word "jazz". Fun Lovin' Criminals, gig review: 'Huey Morgan blends fine guitar work with smokey drawls

My conclusion is that the these two references don't prove that Fun Lovin' Criminals is a jazz band. I would call this a lazy, irresponsible, and false use of sources. Unless there are objections I hope to delete (someday) the Wikiproject Jazz template from the Talk Page and the word "jazz" from the infobox. –Vmavanti (talk) 21:57, 15 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Better? nagualdesign 23:52, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Wow, you found that in about seven seconds. Good old Google, right? Let's look at the source. First, this is an English source, and I've been seeing how jazz is interpreted differently in the old country compared to its birthplace, the New World. Put simply, I'm not sure the Brits know what jazz is. This is an archived source from Get Hampshire which I guess is a newspaper in Hampshire, England, home of Jane Austen and Charles Dickens. Could be an entertainment paper or a grocery store flyer. The article has no author. It's from 2010, updated in 2013. It's an announcement for a concert: "The event is for ages 18 and upwards only – ID required, doors open 7.30pm." The word "jazz" does appear. Twice, in fact. "They are, still, the world's finest and only purveyors of cinematic, hobo, hip-hop, rock 'n' roll, blues-jazz, soul-review vibes." I don't know what "blues-jazz" is, but that string of adjectives doesn't add up to "they are jazz musicians", which is what the article and infobox currently say. The second mention of jazz is "Glastonbury 2008, on the Jazz Word Stage to thunderous reception." I guess Jazz World Stage is a music festival at Glastonbury. But many different kinds of musicians appear at jazz festivals. Appearing at one festival in Glastonbury, England, in 2008 doesn't mean you are as a jazz musician. –Vmavanti (talk) 18:45, 16 January 2018 (UTC)


 * No, I didn't use Google, and if you keep chipping in with these silly assumptions I'm not going to make any more effort with you. You left a note at Talk:Frank Zappa discography so I came here to help. I completely agree with you that the two sources that were in use made no mention of Jazz (although I disagree with your assertion that using them was "lazy [and] irresponsible", since assuming good faith is one of the pillars of Wikipedia). What I used to find a suitable source was the article, which should have been obvious since all I did was change the name of the reference used to "gubbins". nagualdesign 19:04, 16 January 2018 (UTC)


 * In what way did you find that source suitable? In the paragraph above I show how the source is not suitable. It barely even uses the word jazz. EddieHugh's comment suggests that it's illogical to say that a band that blends jazz into its music is the same thing as a band that plays jazz. Sounds like an accurate remark. Thus if this band is going to be called a jazz band in the infobox, it needs references to prove it.Vmavanti (talk) 02:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I try not to get involved in genre clashes, but a pet hate is using a source that says "X blends styles a, b and c", or "X is influenced by styles a, b and c", or similar concoctions, to assert that "X is a style a, b and c musician/band". That's not a logical conclusion. A cameleopard wasn't a camel or a leopard. EddieHugh (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Missing in the discography
Can someone add the other formats - 7", 12", CD etc., and chart positions? At least these are factual additional information sources one can hardly start a quarrel about. 62.145.200.167 (talk) 22:07, 24 October 2019 (UTC)