Talk:Magic Alex/Archive 1

Rambling
Too rambling. Needs ordering with headings —Preceding unsigned comment added by Light current (talk • contribs)

According to Peter Brown, in his book "The Love You Make," Alex successfully seduced Cynthia Lennon the day she discovered John and Yoko in their bathrobes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.190.166 (talk • contribs)

Reply
I defy the "rambling" and "copyedit" person to demonstrate how this article rambles, and to detail exactly which grammar and other mistakes have been made... and to do a better job of it, themselves.

Sources used in this article include All You Need is Ears by George Martin, The Love You Make by Peter Brown, Shout! by Philip Norman, and too many other Beatles and Lennon biographies, printed and online, to practically list here. (A reader of Cynthia Lennon's John contends that Alex was unsuccessful in seducing her, despite Brown's claim, and made this change; I have not read the book, and have no opinion on that point.) Zephyrad 22:20, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

New information?
There is an article from 3 Aug 1979 in which Magic Alex went from becoming an electronics guru to an entrepeneur in a company that specializes in bullet proof cars for royalty, with the deposed King of Greece as his parnter. Read article at: http://www.injustice.org/nemo/newsfile/ns790703.html

In addition, Magic Alex sold a lot of his souvenir from the old beatle days at an auction an made some good money too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.170.169.100 (talk • contribs)

Does anybody know where he he is now? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.14.108.1 (talk • contribs)


 * Why, does he owe you money? :)) --andreasegde (talk) 18:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * No, I'm just interested to know what happened with him, that's all. I mean, being such an "important person" and mentioned many times, one becomes curious, that's all.--200.14.108.1 (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

He's probably blagging his way around Europe, selling boxes of fresh air to people with more money than sense. :)--andreasegde (talk) 18:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

In-line references
Why does this article not have any? --andreasegde (talk) 18:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Because you haven't researched or added them yourself. I did the text, and a list of sources, before this became an issue; now it's your turn. Zephyrad (talk) 23:08, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I might just do that, Zephyrad, after getting Heather Mills a GA rating, with her 182 references 'n all. This article would be a piece of cake. BTW, I'm surprised that when you added the text, you didn't put references in at the same time... :)--andreasegde (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I've said it before, and I'll say it once more: I read most of the relevant material some time ago, and the books I still have are mostly in storage. What I wrote I wrote in a period when jot-and-tittle references were not zealously pursued; check the dates. I have a career outside Wikipedia, and cannot go spend half a day exhuming books, every time somebody wants a page number for something I wrote possibly years ago. I listed what I drew from in an earlier version of this article, and anyone who's that interested should have plenty to go by, to fill the gaps. Zephyrad (talk) 08:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

"the books I still have are mostly in storage". How often have I heard that? Even Kingboyk once said it...:))--andreasegde (talk) 22:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Wow, great job. Regarding India, Harrison and McCartney later said in interviews that they thought that Mardas made up the story about the American nurse. If you think that that's worth noting, I can give you the direct quotes and citations. TimidGuy (talk) 15:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Please do (books with page numbers would be even better). I thank you very much.--andreasegde (talk) 16:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Here it is:


 * Musician magazine, September, 1992, p. 43 (the part in brackets appears that way in the magazine)

Harrison: "Yeah, I called it 'Sexie Sadie.' The title John had was not nice at all. At least he realized that. At least he realized that. Because there was nothing that ever happened except that there was a fella who was supposedly a friend of ours who stirred up and created this big fantasy. [Note: Beatles pal Magic Alex Mardas told John and George that the Maharishi might have made sexual advances to one of the woman pilgrims. This led to a confrontation between Lennon and the Maharishi and Lennon's returning to England.] There was never anything that took place."


 * Miles, Barry, Paul McCartney: Many Years from Now (Holt: 1998), p429

"it was Magic Alex who made the original accusation and I think it was completely untrue." (Miles is quoting Paul) TimidGuy (talk) 18:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks, TimidGuy.--andreasegde (talk) 22:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikify much?
This article is so bad that I don't even want to read it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.15.185.28 (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
 * So stop complaining and write a better one yourself, if you think it's so bad? Zephyrad (talk) 23:37, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I have started putting some references in, and have cleaned a lot of text.--andreasegde (talk) 07:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Headers
There may seem to be too many headers in at the moment, but they will be expanded, as soon as more info is found. Patience is a virtue...--andreasegde (talk) 10:48, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

The law and Magic Alex
The Independent newspaper apologised to Mardas on this page. Quote: "We accept that he [Mardas] did not claim to have invented electric paint, a flying saucer or a recording studio with a "sonic force field" or cause his employers to waste money on such ideas." Wikipedia: "Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous." This could seriously ruin any chance of taking the article further. Comments?--andreasegde (talk) 17:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? There's only one citation for the Independent, and it doesn't appear related to the article referenced in the correction listed above. The correction only applies to the information in one specific article (which I could not find online), not info published elsewhere (that's obviously unrelated to the Independent article). However, "any further" is a relative term, considering that much of the recently added material regarding other people also requires the stringent sourcing per WP:BLP. Given the amount of unencyclopedic description and non-notable details involved, I don't think these sources are adequate for the large amount of content contained in this article. Flowanda | Talk 19:51, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Having a respected UK newspaper apologise about what is already in this article is a thorny problem. (I know that The Independent's lawyers looked closely at the problem before advising). If Mardas (or his lawyers) can get The Independent to recant a piece, then they could also do it here. Obviously the financial problems of taking everyone to court is not feasible, but they have a precedent =
 * 1. Law. A legal decision or form of proceeding serving as an authoritative rule or pattern in future, or similar, or analogous cases.
 * 2. Any act, decision, or case that serves as a guide or justification for subsequent situations.

It's in black and white: "We [The Independent newspaper] accept that he [Mardas] did not claim to have invented electric paint" (etc., etc.,) Rewriting this article to get around that would a horror: Throw out all the stuff about the inventions he claimed to have invented/tried but didn't deliver, and what have you got? Mardas pacing up and down outside Cynthia Lennon's Italian hotel, having a drunken grope, and going on holiday.--andreasegde (talk) 00:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The interesting thing is that I looked for "Mardas", "Magic Alex", etc., in The Times and The Daily Mail today, and got nothing. All I found was the apology (and not the original article) in The Independent. Somebody has been cleaning, methinks. --andreasegde (talk) 01:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, if he sidesteps an aticle by saying he never claimed he could invent electric paint, (which may be true, if you hold your breath) they also wrote that he never caused "his employers to waste money on such ideas". That's the crux of it.--andreasegde (talk) 01:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I quote Mr. Wales: Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons — whether the material is negative, positive, or just questionable — should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion, from Wikipedia articles, talk pages, user pages, and project space.

I think it's 1-0 to Mr. Mardas. The old (word of your choice here) still has life in him. :)--andreasegde (talk) 01:31, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Bringing up legal issues eclipses any other discussion and needs to be dealt with immediately at Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard or Administrators' noticeboard. Please don't delay; anything WP:BLP is a serious issue and needs to be dealt with by WP:ADMIN or WP:OTRS. Flowanda | Talk 01:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you can leave the material in safely by sourcing various statements. Relating that George Martin, Peter Brown, Philip Norman et al remembered this or that in their respective books, footnoted accordingly, ought to cover the legal angle, presuming there is cause for concern. We're not making accusations or ruining careers, we're simply noting what others have said about this person. These books are also not current works; I believe a couple are out of print. Zephyrad (talk) 08:28, 31 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Also... The mention that Mardas's patents were all turned down comes from Peter Brown's The Love You Make. All someone needs to do is find the page number and write up the reference. Nothing to bust a gut over. Zephyrad (talk) 08:35, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
 * His ideas for inventions can be sourced to the Beatles themselves, who describe them in the Beatles Anthology. I have a copy of the print version and could look up some info. TimidGuy (talk) 10:41, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, I will bow to your collective wisdom.--andreasegde (talk) 12:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I added it to this page. I will wait for an answer before I proceed.--andreasegde (talk) 22:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Reference 9
The New Statesman article (by Duncan Campbell) is full of stuff. Mardas had involvements with the Queen, as well as Charles and Diana, believe it or not.--andreasegde (talk) 14:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Name change
I have changed the name (Alex Mardas (Magic Alex)) as it reflects the use of his real name throughout the article.--andreasegde (talk) 23:15, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * For once, I have to agree with Koavf. Mardas is/was most commonly known as "Magic Alex", and I think that's how the entry should remain named. Zephyrad (talk) 02:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Although a little bit funny that he left NO message on this page, huh?
 * Magic Alex (discounting the title) is mentioned FIVE times.
 * Alex (alone) is mentioned TWICE.
 * Mardas is mentioned over SEVENTY times.

Can someone please give me a sane reason why this article is called Magic Alex?--andreasegde (talk) 14:00, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The name Mardas is mentioned that many times, because YOU mentioned it that many; a future editor could go in and delete or change any number of those mentions. By this same logic, why isn't Paul McCartney listed as James McCartney, since THAT is HIS real name? Or Ringo Starr as Richard Starkey? Or John Wayne as Marion Morrison, as far as that goes? Shall I go on? Zephyrad (talk) 17:25, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Is one mad here, methinks? Did one put Mardas' name in so many times because one just felt like it? Does one understand that all references to Mardas were put in because that is what was mentioned in articles that one looked at, and referenced properly? Does one think that Alexis Mardas still refers to himself as Magic Alex? The mind boggles...

Your examples show a large misunderstanding in your reasoning:
 * McCartney is always called McCartney in articles after first mentioning in the infobox and Lead that his real name is James Paul McCartney. Does one not know that?
 * I believe one is talking about people that changed their names after they were born, but the nickname Magic Alex was NOT Alexis Mardas' choice, it was Lennon's.

If one is being so absurd about it, this user thinks that you can go boil your head in a comfortable pan of your choice, because this article will not be taken to a GA rating in the near future by yours truly. Maybe you could do it, as you seem so keen on giving advice about how others could improve the article. BTW, I realise that it took a lot of effort to start this article, and you are to be congratulated, so after you have had a bit of a rest, maybe you could put in a bit more elbow grease? I thank you, and good luck.--andreasegde (talk) 20:28, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * By this same token... your arguments show at least as large a misunderstanding as you claim for me, plus a lack of TACT to boot. Personal attacks, veiled insults, backhanded compliments, and patronizing will NOT get you the approval you seek. (BTW, one more such attack or comment like you've just made, and I start showing this page to admins, OUTSIDE the Beatles Project. You are on notice.) You're also dodging the point I raised: Is Paul McCartney listed as James McCartney, since that IS his name? He is not. Did Mardas spend the next several years telling Lennon and others "Don't call me Magic Alex, damnit!" He did not. Has he sued anyone for calling him that in print? He has not. Is Ringo Starr called Ringo at home? The last I knew, his family called him Ritchie. As to my "effort" or "rest"... I reiterate, I have a life and career outside of Wikipedia. I write things here in my spare time, drawing on what I already know. If you have whole days to research and write matters, more power to ya. Will you still have as much time to devote to it in five years? Probably not. Zephyrad (talk) 21:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Most common names See NC. Naming conventions (people) gives no provision for the style   (Nickname); only   or most common name. Putting a nickname in parenthesis after his proper name implies a disambiguation which does not exist. Your post on my talk was belligerent; please don't be so aggressive in the future. It will only make talking with other editors more difficult. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:34, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll bet you both that you never take this article to a GA rating, which will prove to me that your interest in an argument is more important than the quality of Wikpedia. How sad, and negative...--andreasegde (talk) 21:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * So? You're right; I have no interest in this topic nor background to add to it, but I understand naming conventions. What does that have to do with anything? I'm not interested in arguing, as you were the one who posted on my talk, not vice versa. Again, if you want to have a good rapport with other editors, you should be less belligerent and make an intelligible argument in favor of your position rather than resorting to this childish name-calling. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

So, Justin (koavf), who's been a naughty boy then? Blocked 19 times? Tut-tut...--212.241.64.236 (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

GA
IMO, this article is getting seriously close to a GA review. Any dissenters?--andreasegde (talk) 23:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, me. Sod it, I'm off.--andreasegde (talk) 20:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Archive
I have archived the talk page, although it is sad that this article can not be a GA.--BeatlesProject (talk) 13:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Focus?
There is some interesting details about The Beatles contained within this article. However, there also appears to be some trivia. It is sometimes difficult to work out exactly what this guy did or did not do. I'd like to help out with the request for help to bring this to GA standard, but I suspect that it would require quite a bit of research to establish the guy's notability, and to remove the padding that now exists. There is information contained in sections, and that information has cites - but unfortunately some of those cites are blogs, while a number of others are books which take time to locate and check, so it may be helpful to have other sources to back up the existing claims in order to pass the "Factually accurate and verifiable" section of GA - Google Books often allow sight of the content of books, and that's worth looking into. (No GA reviewer could pass an article without being able to check the sources). The information sometimes reads as gossip, rather than encyclopedic content (the entire Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and India section for example, which also leans toward POV, as it appears to be pushing an assertion that Mardis was a a significant influence on breaking up The Beatles relationship with the Maharishi - a powerful and interesting claim!). A little bit of focus and trimming, and writing in a style which points up the encyclopedic nature of the topic would be helpful. I'll pop this on my watch-list and if nobody else has helped out by the time I have finished working on George Harrison I might have a go. Good luck! An interesting character!  SilkTork  *YES! 15:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

GA
If this is not a GA article I will eat my hat.--andreasegde (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Too right. Article quality and standard of writing looks very good to me. I've made a few tweaks on a first pass through the first two sections may read/tweak more if I get a chance. Bon Voyage. PL290 (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm putting it up for a GA.--andreasegde (talk) 12:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Greek islands
A few points of possible interest about Trinity Island. a) It's said to be guitar-shaped! Is this noteworthy or merely fun? b) Not sure if it's accurate (it may be) to say it's in Greece. c) It is currently for sale if anyone's interested! Ignoring (c), we could perhaps use something like:
 * The Beatles had tried in 1964 to buy the 14 acre Trinity Island, off the coast of the Greek island of Euboea and resembling a guitar in shape, but

Also we're told at one point that Mardas alleged he could speed the acquisition of an island because "many islands did have the right certificates of ownership and were subject to government restrictions". I wanted to clarify this sentence but I'm not sure what it means! PL290 (talk) 07:06, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Go for it.--andreasegde (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * certificates of ownership? That's quite possibly Greek bureaucracy. Who knows who owns which island?--andreasegde (talk) 15:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The trouble is, the implication is that islands which lacked the right certificates, or perhaps even only those having the wrong certificates, were not subject to government restrictions! As this seems a most unlikely state of affairs—and one still less likely to have either given Mardas the alleged advantage or convinced The Beatles he had it—I have to assume there's something wrong with the sentence, but I don't know what! I suppose if it bothers me or anyone else sufficiently, research to establish what must be being referred to will become necessary. PL290 (talk) 15:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

What A Shame Mary Jane
He co-wrote a song with John Lennon: surely worth a mention? Even though it wasn't released, the fact of doing so brings a further aspect of his relationship with the band. (see A Hard Day's Write p.114 or I can elaborate in the article if agreed of interest) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PL290 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * With a ref? Please put it in.--andreasegde (talk) 08:20, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * It's there (para 3 of London and...). PL290 (talk) 09:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Saw you edited the title I put, but according to my book (here we go again, hee hee!), what you put's just a line from the song and the title is as I had it:
 * "This was a thing I wrote half with our electronic genius Alex", said John in 1969. "It was called 'What A Shame Mary Jane Had A Pain At The Party' and it was meant for 'The Beatles' album.

Do you have something saying the title was the shorter one, then? PL290 (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * What's the New Mary Jane.--andreasegde (talk) 06:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

True; and I see it was released by that name on Anthology 3. Best to use the short name then. Interestingly, as I expect you saw, What's the New Mary Jane contains: "The song was held off another 10 years, during which time it gained a certain aura of mystery. During this time, it could only be heard via bootlegs like [...] and What A Shame, Mary Jane Had A Pain At The Party, which is an album that is solely dedicated to this song."

which probably accounts for Lennon's "a thing I wrote half" utterance using the longer name. PL290 (talk) 07:25, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * The version on Anthology is just Lennon laughing whilst singing most of the time.--andreasegde (talk) 08:23, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Call it The Beatles: Magic Alex
Maybe? Given that the article could be seen as being not so much a biography of Yanni (later John) Alexis Mardas, but rather, a Beatles article (the word does occur, I checked). The name Magic Alex was their name for him, and he did work with them from 1965 to 1969, not just for a week or something. Just a thought. PL290 (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Good idea, as it would be in line with the other sub-articles.--andreasegde (talk) 18:21, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The Maharishi
A change was made to this article to change "the Maharishi" to just "Maharishi" throughout. This was a surprise to me as it's rendered "the Maharishi" in the published works I've seen. Also in the article Maharishi Mahesh Yogi. I have undone the change as it doesn't appear to agree with the normal convention. I suggest discussion here if anyone considers this incorrect. PL290 (talk) 07:18, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


 * You did the right thing. Asian English often leaves out the definite article.--andreasegde (talk) 09:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

name of the article
Im just going to change this to "Magic Alex" if you dont mind Zobango (talk) 20:04, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Was and were
I'm shocked! You actually used the word "were" in your article. In the section London and The Beatles, the openning paragraph you have "...although they were not impressed with the..." Good for you, my friend! - Best,--76.198.234.254 (talk) 19:44, 11 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Because it was about the individual members, and not the name. One could never say "they was not impressed". It's basic English, old chap. "The Rolling Stones is a group" is correct.--andreasegde (talk) 08:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, now you're onto something here if you say "name". "The Rolling Stones" is the name of a group. But the Rolling Stones are a group. 'Fraid you'll have to switch your allegiance to R.E.M. or somesuch if you wanna use that kinda lingo! PL290 (talk) 08:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * You're almost getting it, PL290. It's a very subtle difference, but the difference is there. The Beatles was a group, but The Beatles were Lennon, McCartney, Harrison and Starr.--andreasegde (talk) 10:11, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Surely it must be The Monkees you're thinking of there! Still, you have the names right... keep working on it though. Congratulations anyway on the GA pass, achieved, unlike that of The Beatles in Hamburg, without much interference from me. After working together such a lot on that one, I thought you'd appreciate a bit more space of your own, but always happy to work together again. You seem to have a tremendous ability for content-gathering. PL290 (talk) 11:01, 12 July 2009 (UTC)