Talk:John Ratcliff (producer)

Autobiography tag
Hello, I left a maintenance tag on the article because I noticed there are some P.S. notes and anecdotes in the article body that seem to have been written by the the person in question.

I notice Johnratcliff has been active in the page history (and it's great to see contributions to Wikipedia), but it makes parts of this article questionably verifiable and neutral.

See Template:Autobiography for more info about why the tag is there and what can be done about it.

Mlkj (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Like what exactly? 80.195.64.101 (talk) 16:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, I see you have expanded the P.S. note in with article. Taking that as an example, it currently reads "without the massive input, faith and tenacity of Ratcliff they would have been on their way back to Norway". This doesn't seem to be something that an independent secondary source said. Especially looking at the page history, large parts of the article seem autobiographical: a person writing about themselves in an article.
 * This is a problem, because there is a clear conflict-of-interest. See WP:Autobiography for more background on why this is discouraged. Mlkj (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
 * When you read my forthcoming book you will realise much more about my relationship with the band - that I haven’t bothered to reveal until now.I suggest to you that as I know more about the early years of a-ha than you ever will, buy it. I may be inclined to add more personal comments regarding my involvement on this site. Just to make everything crystal clear. I will come out of this with even more credibility than before. I suggest you keep your nose out of matters that you know nothing about. You weren’t there. I was.btw….’going back on the boat to Norway’ was a quote from Andrew Wickham at Warners after he heard the first roughs produced by Tony Mansfield! I look forward to your response. Were you born in 1985?217.137.18.193 (talk) 01:27, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay. I'm glad you're writing a book, that sounds very interesting.
 * However the reason I keep talking about independent secondary sources is because anyone could claim what you're claiming, and we have no way to know. I'm sure you're an honest person, but just taking people's word for it is no way to run an encyclopedia. Claims in an article need to be verifiable, not just someone who says they were there.
 * After you publish your book, people could assess that it's a published reliable source and use it as a reference in an article. That would be okay, it's very different from someone showing up and saying they were there, with no source to back it up. Hope that makes sense. Cheers. Mlkj (talk) 09:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ok,I have a witness, or witnesses to everything that I have tried to add. Do you want them to swear an affidavit? Johnratcliff (talk) 10:06, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

By the way I am not just’anyone’and I didn’t just show up, you cheeky person. Do you ever question Morten, Mags or Pal? Or are they too famous for you to ask? You haven’t heard the last from me. But then I suppose you will just refuse to print the truths that I have always written. I may take this further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnratcliff (talk • contribs) 10:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)


 * John, sorry if I'm coming across the wrong way, but this really isn't anything against you.
 * Any of the people Wikipedia has articles about could come down, from Earth or from Heaven, and the same policy would apply to them as well. You can see I haven't actually removed anything you've added to this article. But the policies are there for some pretty good reasons!
 * If your witnesses are willing to write things down, publish it on paper or on the Internet, they that's a source and you may very well be able to cite it in an article, provided those are credible people. You have to understand, people just want to be able to verify what an article says.
 * Think of it like how a journalist won't just accept any story without trying to corroborate it. Neither does an encyclopedia. Articles need to have reliable secondary sources, like journal articles, books, web site, et cetera.
 * Please be sure of one thing, no one's too famous to ask. I don't remember ever seeing any exceptions, and it'd be shocking if anyone tried. It's very egalitarian in this way. Mlkj (talk) 11:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I accept all that you have said. You sound like a very good investigative writer.Everything I have ever written about my extensive involvement with these 3 Norwegians is completely based on fact and real events.The band do not like hearing accurate and truthful reports concerning the early days! That’s life!
 * I thank you for your correspondence.
 * John 217.137.18.193 (talk) 18:34, 28 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I hope to continue using Wikipedia as it is a great site. I’ve been on it, I think, from the very beginning.I seem to have become embroiled in a minor matter of correcting/adding an entry and met with a rather unnecessary response. Never mind…I’ll get over it! I will continue to use and recommend Wikipedia to the few people I know who don’t already have it!
 * John Ratcliff Johnratcliff (talk) 04:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)