Jump to content

User talk:Fountaindyke~enwiki

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome

[edit]

Hello Fountaindyke~enwiki, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions: your considered thoughts on the talk pages of Anne Frank and George W. Bush. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

Gareth Hughes 02:09, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Pete Townshend

[edit]

Thanks for your thoughtful contribution on this matter. I'm sorry your thoughts were shot down rather harshly. I have been laboring on this issue for the past few weeks - and it has regrettably become rather contentious. It certainly helps when others contribute and bring light rather than heat.

I had been focused on one key issue - whether it was fair for Wikipedia to brand Townshend as a "Child Sex Offender" or even just "Sex Offender" in his cateory section (without any modifying note) - when he was neither prosecuted nor convicted. Something that I think would be impossible where due process is required. And that issue is still being weighed by people on Wikipedia. I have asked a lawyer friend of mine to look at the various legal assertions - and provide a concise response that makes it clear for laypersons.

But you raised an equally important point that perhaps should be explored further. It's a thought that had not occurred to me. You have questioned the overall weight and extent of the topic on the Townshend article in relation to his achievements and impact. You seem to feel that it is disproportionate. It's a very interesting point. As currently presented it does seem to overwhelm the page. In ways that the legal problems and personal scandals of artists such as Chuck Berry, Willie Nelson and Jerry Lee Lewis do not overwhelm THEIR articles.

I believe that the event must be noted in the article. It should not be swept under the carpet as though it never happened. On the other hand - it IS a very complex matter to explain. And therefore takes up space. Perhaps the topic would be dealt with better as a sub-page - linked to from the main Townshend article? A brief notation that there was an incident that excited media attention for 5 months in 2003. A succinct summary. And a link to a page where the chapter and verse can be laid out (if people feel it necessary). I don't know the Wikipedia guidelines on that. What do you think? Davidpatrick 15:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your account will be renamed

[edit]

23:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

[edit]

12:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)