Talk:Joseph Merrick/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Barenaked Ladies song If I Had $1000000 should be added to "Cultural influence" section

I noticed that the Barenaked Ladies song If I Had $1000000 was not included with the other songs listed that referenced Merrick. That song is one of the band's most popular songs and explicitly references Merrick. I think it should be included with the others and I see that several other people have already mentioned it on this talk page.-Schnurrbart (talk) 21:41, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd argue that the only things that should be included in the section are works of art inspired by Merrick's story. The BNL song only mentions Merrick in passing, probably riffing off the rumor that Michael Jackson tried to buy the bones, so it would be pretty trivial to include here (although a link from the article about the song to this page would be okay.)

Along those lines, unless there are any objections I'd like to remove the The Cleveland Show and Fall of Troy references. Tdslk (talk) 06:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

I think the BNL song should be mentioned in the Michael Jackson paragraph. After all, the Merrick reference in the song is about the Michael Jackson story. This shows the cultural impact of the story. Besides, people will continue to add the BNL song to this article in good faith for year to come as they have for a long time already so we may as well mention it. This fact just highlights the cultural relevance of the song and why it should be mentioned in the "cultural influence" section of the article.-Schnurrbart (talk) 03:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The story is really about MJ, though, not Merrick, so I'd argue that a reference to the song would be more appropriate in an article about MJ. Likewise, I would argue that the song shouldn't be brought up in the article about chimpanzees, although mentioning MJ's pet chimpanzee would be acceptable (under a subheading like Famous Chimps or Pet Chimps), and then in the MJ article, something like "MJ's eccentricities, such as keeping a pet chimp and attempting to purchase the Elephant Man's bones, were parodied in the song IIH$1000000". Looking at the revision history, though, you're definitely right that $1000000 has been added and deleted multiple times. Since this keeps coming up, I'd say it would be an appropriate topic for a RfC. Would you agree? Tdslk (talk) 06:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I think a reference to the song should be mentioned in both this article and a relevant section of the MJ article and don't see why it should only be mentioned in one article. I don't see any point to having a RfC because I think people will keep adding a reference to the BNL song to this article because they think it's relevant information that belongs in this article long after this discussion is over. This will create a situation in which a few editors are constantly reverting many peoples' good faith edits for years to come.-Schnurrbart (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

The point of the RfC would be to decide whether or not the topic belongs here. Sure, people may continue to add it as a good faith edit, but just because an edit was done in good faith doesn't mean it shouldn't be reverted. Still, this is a pretty minor issue, so perhaps an RfC is not merited. Would you be okay with asking for a third opinion? Tdslk (talk) 17:51, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalice tangent -- llywrch (talk) 20:45, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Rejig of lead badly required.

Hi all, the lead is way too long and is composed of material that is mentioned further down in the body of the article, beneath the headings related to Joseph Merrick's Biography. If there is no discussion over the next few days, I intend removing around 80% of the material, specifically most of the text from "When he was 11, his mother died..." and re-editing the article for readability. Cheers Read-write-services (talk) 02:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Ok, please don't remove 80% of the lead. I am currently working on this article with a view to getting it to WP:GA and while that doesn't indicate ownership (!) I appreciate you posting here first. Per WP:LEAD, the lead section is supposed to adequately summarise the article, and most of the time, it's supposed to summarise all of the main facts from the rest of the article. I've actually cut a lot out of it already to keep it down to the recommended four paragraphs. Any specific suggestions you have to improve readability are very welcome, but cutting 80% of the lead would be far too radical and would not comply with the manual of style. The lead is supposed to be more like an overview rather than just an introduction. It's supposed to be able to act like a mini stand-alone article.

I've put a lot of work into this recently, and the article has grown in length, so inevitably the lead has too. There is a current peer review going on, by the way, (Wikipedia:Peer review/Joseph Merrick/archive1), so you might want to read what's there and make comments there if you like. You'll see some comments on the previous length of the lead!--BelovedFreak 07:56, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

• Hi BelovedFreak, No worries-I know EXACTLY what it is like when someone comes along and removes/deletes and generally ruins ones great work! (read my talk page for the whole saga on Introduction to Viruses) I will leave it alone. Kind regards, Cheers! Read-write-services (talk) 23:47, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your understanding, although it was by no means a request to back off and if you do have any further suggestions as the article develops, please do suggest them!--BelovedFreak 18:20, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Discussion at WikiProject Disability

There is a discussion about this article at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Disability#Joseph_Merrick. The conversation is specifically about political correctness as it relates to the historical and social context of events and issues discussed in this article. Please participate. Roger (talk) 13:23, 6 July 2010 (UTC)