Talk:Murder of John Lennon/Archive 2

Assassination vs. Murder
I recognize that Lennon's murder is technically also an assassination (i.e. murder of a high-profile individual.) However, as I understand it, the people who say he was "assassinated" tend to be implying that this was a CIA hit (or whatever;) the prevailing theory, of course, is that he was simply murdered by a nutcase. So, the article as it now reads ("Lennon's murder—considered by some to be an assassination due to his high profile") is technically correct. However, I'm not sure why the term assassination is used at all unless the conspiracy theory is going to be discussed. (For the record, I think the conspiracy theory is pure rubbish, but it may still be, perhaps, sufficiently notable to mention in this article.)JoelWhy (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * An assassination is simply the killing of a public figure, generally for political reasons. The word carries no necessary connotation of a conspiracy.  Plenty of people who were killed by deranged loners are considered to have been assassinated; for example, Presidents James Garfield and William McKinley.  I don't see any problem with the current text on this point.  --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 02:06, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Again, I agree that this technically was an assassination. However, because there already exists a conspiracy theory around his death, the term assassination in this context may be viewed in a different manner. John Hinkley attempted to assassinate Reagan. I'm not aware of any claims that Hinkley was a CIA operative (although, now that I type this sentence, I'm thinking if I googled it I would find just such a theory out there...) I guess my only point is that I would not want people reading the article thinking it implied the conspiracy theory was somehow being validated. Not a major issue, but I'm just not sure what purpose the word "assassination" serves in this article given this potential issue.JoelWhy (talk) 14:01, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for clearing that up. I understand where you're coming from, but to me it seems that solely calling John Lennon's death a murder is an understatement of his fame, and that conspiracy theorists will not look to the title of this as confirmation of their ideas. I wonder, though, if since yesterday's "On This Day" called his death an assassination, that it's okay to call his death an assassination here. Salvaria (talk) 15:57, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I see your point. In any case, it's not a particularly important issue (especially the way it is worded in the current article.) As for the On This Day issue, I actually notified them of this issue yesterday, and they "corrected" it to say "shot and killed" rather than "assassinated."JoelWhy (talk) 17:07, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware that it had changed; I must have only seen it in the morning. As long as Wikipedia is consistant on which term to use, then I am fine with calling his death a murder. Thank you for your investigation. Salvaria (talk) 18:09, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I am okay with "murder,", but "assassination" is also correct, even if Chapman was only a deranged fan. Lennon was not just a public figure, he was an intensely political change agent. Over and over that night you could hear news reports saying that police were handling the case carefully, saying it was as important as if an American President had died. WABC's Shelley Sondstein, interviewing people outside the Dakota, said they were telling her Lennon's death was more important to them than the death of a President. --Bluejay Young (talk) 05:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I really think this article should be re-titled "Assassination of John Lennon", to be consistent with "Assassination of Abraham Lincoln" etc. John Lennon was a high-profile person, so I think assassination is an appropriate word for the article title.--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 19:54, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

can we please change the title to “Assassination of John Lennon”. John was a very important person and his death wasn’t just a murder, it was an important event as well. a very important football game was interrupted to report his death. that’s very unusual for a sportscaster to do. and Lennon was a very highly respected figure. Imagine offline (talk) 20:45, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Cleaning
This article needs a very good sweep with a very stiff broom. I have made some corrections, but it needs more.--andreasegde (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

The Haircut
Although Ono recalls him going for a haircut on Monday, 8 December, he got the haircut on Saturday, 6 December. Photos from the BBC radio interview he did that day show the haircut. Barbers were closed on Mondays in NY back then. Hotcop2 (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyrighted material
Just a heads up.

I've come across a link added as a reference, to cite the sentence: ''Moran asked, "Are you John Lennon?" to which Lennon nodded and replied "Yes".'' This reference has remained in the article since as early as 2012.

This link is to a YouTube video entitled, "The John Lennon Assassination Part 2". The video, as the uploader describes: "is a video from my personal home collection. It is an episode of A&E's American Justice which details the assassination of John Lennon. This is part two" - the series, American Justice is copyrighted and that video uploaded on that person's personal YouTube channel is therefore a copyright-violation. Per WP:COPYVIO, "Copyright infringing material should also not be linked to."

I have therefore replaced the link, with the appropriate reference ([ http://www.amazon.com/American-Justice-John-Lennon-Assassination/dp/B000CSTK5Q ]).

Although it was just one reference, part of the Good article criteria is that "the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct" (criteria 1:A) — Death of John Lennon is no exception to this. Regards, — Mel bourne Star ☆ talk 11:08, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Further, I have removed another two references from YouTube and Blogspot, of news videos - both of which do not have the copyright owner's consent, to have been uploaded on YouTube and Blogspot in the first place. — Mel bourne Star ☆ talk 11:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Local time
Although it is obvious, the times given are by local time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.5.40 (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Eastern Standard Time is being used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 21kstpz (talk • contribs) 08:24, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Types of bullets
In the Murder section, I noticed an inconsistency in the first paragraph which stated at the beginning that semiwadcutters were used and towards the end stated hollow-points were used. I checked the cited reference after each sentence and neither corroborate the semiwadcutter claim and the first supports the hollow-point claim. So I changed the first instance to hollow-point bullets. 71.65.237.218 (talk) 16:53, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There seems to be no direct evidence, such as photographs of the bullets. We have to rely on the word of a source. One bullet missed altogether. I don't know if it was ever found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.71.148 (talk) 16:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.93.17 (talk) 09:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * At this stage it is hard to say, as it is so late.
 * Hollow-points cause more damage, but semiwadcutters might have been used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.192.116 (talk) 10:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Add
It could be added that the Police realised that Lennon was in such a bad way that they thought an ambulance would be too slow. This is why they used the Police car, not an ambulance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.183.71.148 (talk) 16:39, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * This is now in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.51.183 (talk • contribs) 10:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

Seriously?
This whole section

''It was decided that Cosell, who had interviewed Lennon during a 1974 broadcast and who had expressed some apprehension about telling the viewers that Lennon had been murdered, should relay the news. An exchange below and began shortly before the end of the game.[41] Cosell: ... but (the game)'s suddenly been placed in total perspective for us; I'll finish this, they're in the hurry-up offense. Gifford: Third down, four. (Chuck) Foreman ... it'll be fourth down. (Matt) Cavanaugh will let it run down for one final attempt, he'll let the seconds tick off to give Miami no opportunity whatsoever. (whistle blows) Timeout is called with three seconds remaining, John Smith is on the line. And I don't care what's on the line, Howard, you have got to say what we know in the booth. Cosell: Yes, we have to say it. Remember this is just a football game, no matter who wins or loses. An unspeakable tragedy confirmed to us by ABC News in New York City: John Lennon, outside of his apartment building on the West Side of New York City, the most famous perhaps, of all of The Beatles, shot twice in the back, rushed to Roosevelt Hospital, dead on arrival. Hard to go back to the game after that news flash, which, in duty bound, we have to take. Frank? Gifford: (after a pause) Indeed, it is.[42]''

is ridiculous. Lennon was an international artist. How the news of his death was broken in the US, as opposed to any other country, is not really notable - and certainly not deserving of this massive quotefest of inanity. This whole section should be cut. 86.154.218.83 (talk) 21:21, 17 September 2014 (UTC)


 * I agree. It's a ridiculous amount of unnecessary detail. Also - nothing on how the announcement was made in any other country than the US? He was a British artist, so I'd expect at least something about how the news was broken in the UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.224.44 (talk) 12:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Respectfully disagree. This was as far as I know the first reporting of his death anywhere in the world - not just "breaking news in the US". Also, having Cosell interrupt a major football game for a celebrity death was unusual and not something that happens all the time, and was notable from a broadcasting history standpoint, not just from a celebrity death standpoint. Having said that, I do agree with you that something about how the news was broken in the UK could also be added as that was Lennon's country of origin.TheBlinkster (talk) 12:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Type of Gun
Is there any need for the type of gun to be mentioned in the infobox? I'm asking whether it is notable. As a comparison, if someone makes a major speech the type of microphone used is not usually included.Thesman123 (talk) 12:07, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe it should be. Broadcasters might be interested in what Dr. King was using, for instance. Anyway, I don't know whether the Charter Arms .38 in Lennon's death is Wikipedia-notable, but it was certainly prominently featured that night. The information probably came from Police Chief Sullivan when he spoke before reporters shortly after the official announcement of Lennon's death. Every radio report thereafter mentioned it. --Bluejay Young (talk) 20:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * It has some importance. The type is connected with the destructiveness of the bullets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nothing6547 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The type of bullet is important.
 * Full metal jacket is possible.
 * A Glaser is, too.
 * A wad-cutter is possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nothing6547 (talk • contribs) 17:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

WP:FTN
Relevant discussion at Fringe theories/Noticeboard. - Location (talk) 04:04, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Death of John Lennon. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080411074933/http://www.crimelibrary.com:80/terrorists_spies/assassins/chapman/8.html to http://www.crimelibrary.com/terrorists_spies/assassins/chapman/8.html
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.itv.com/presscentre/thedayjohnlennondied/week49/default.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 02:49, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Put Out the Fire
Aside from life is Real, Queen also produced a song about Gun Control in America on the same album called Put Out the Fire. (http://www.queenonline.com/en/the-band/discography/hot-space/) The lyrics seem to make very direct reference to Lennon's death.

Lyrics in question:

They called him a hero

In the land of the Free

But he wouldn't Shake My Hand Boy (As in Chapman shaking John's hand)

So I got my Handgun

And I Blew Him Away

Do you think this detail should be added in? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfpack40351 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

Reactions of the other Beatles to the death?
Apart from mentioning the tribute songs made later, this article seems to contain nothing about the public reactions of his former bandmates the Beatles to his death. I would expect there to be some mention of this - should be added in my opinion. TheBlinkster (talk) 12:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

From a video I saw, Paul McCartney didn't want to talk about it. He was surrounded by police at his studio though.Trillfendi (talk) 17:23, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

This article doesn't even mention the "it's a drag" controversy? Strange. There should be a "Reactions" section.--Ilovetopaint (talk) 13:06, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Paul McCartney's subsequent attendance at an anti-gun rally in the US in 2018 should be mentioned since his motivation was the murder of Lennon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr gobrien (talk • contribs) 16:11, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Title change
I think we should change the title of this article to "Murder of John Lennon." Your thoughts? MagicatthemovieS (talk) 12:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree - there's no reason not to. Jim Michael (talk) 12:41, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

yes it’s an assassination Imagine offline (talk) 20:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 3 May 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Moved &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Death of John Lennon → Murder of John Lennon – Assassination of John Lennon might be too strong, but he certainly was murdered and didn't 'die' as if by old age or disease. The issue is not new on the talk, but was never brought much further. Just speaking from my gut here, challenge me away!:) Gaioa (talk) 06:53, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I believe it should be moved to Murder of John Lennon because that's what it was... he was murdered. He was shot dead. He didn't die of natural causes. I don't think it should be called assassination because he wasn't killed for political reasons; Mark David Chapman said he killed him because he was jealous of his fame. He didn't kill him for his activism.Trillfendi (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose - This article is about more than just the murder, it is also about the aftermath of Lennon's death. —  InsertCleverPhraseHere  09:44, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Support, yes, aftermath - of his murder. Aftermath would have been different if died another way. Hyperbolick (talk) 15:19, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. "Death" is technically non-specific but would rarely be idiomatically used for a person who died as a result of being murdered, which is what occurred, and the precision of its use here here adds no ambiguity.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:43, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Support per Fuhghettaboutit. Lepricavark (talk) 14:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Lennon Report
While described in the article in terms that make it sound like a documentary, The Lennon Report is a dramatization closer to the two films about Chapman than to a documentary or even a docu-drama. It seems to serve mostly to play up Alan Weiss' part in the events. I'm therefore not sure that this article needs to have a section on it, especially one that disputes the participation of Dr. Lynn in the struggle to save Lennon's life. Does this need to be edited down, or perhaps deleted and put in a separate article focusing just on this film? --Bluejay Young (talk) 13:44, 2 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I've just finished watching the film. It might be better if the sources that were used to create the film were cited, interviews with the doctors etc. If Dr. Lynn really didn't work on John as he has been saying all these years he had, this is major. What I'd really like to see is something from Dr. Lynn about this. Also, that Kathleen Sullivan thing, where she is claimed to be the first to break the story on CNN; She definitely did break in very early with a bulletin. I have a sound clip of this. But there's no way to tell what time it aired. I wonder if I could actually call CNN and get someone to help me track down the time. Stuff was pretty chaotic. --Bluejay Young (talk) 22:59, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Dr Lynn's involvement: actually Dr David Halleran was the trauma surgeon
This documentary programme on BBC Radio 4 shows that Dr Lynn was not involved as described in the Wikipedia article. The trauma surgeon who undertook Lennon's heart massage was Dr David Halleran:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08tfsqb

The documentary has a lot of detail of what happened at the hospital that night. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.136.225.189 (talk) 16:02, 5 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you. That is already covered in the article. Hotcop2 (talk) 02:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)