Jump to content

Talk:Kris Kristofferson/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Kristofferson Narrated the award-winning documentary about military children: "Brats: Our Journey Home". That should be in the article

The documentary is about the children of career military families. The documentary won 19 awards and Kristofferson is the main narrator as well as having written much of the score music and also being one of the documentaries subjects. Kristofferson was one of these children himself. Shouldn't this be in the Wikipedia article? The subject of Kristofferson being an ex-military brat, and also the documentary are worthy of their own small section I would think. I saw this film and was blown away by it (I am also a former brat). This is a major work and should be noted in the article.

70.219.67.243 (talk) 03:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Naked motorcycle statue

I've removed this from the article: "Students of Merton College later voted that the college should erect a statue of Kristofferson, naked astride a motorcycle of his choice, in Front Quad but funds were never made available."

Lord knows I want this to be true, and if there is any justice in this world it should be true, but I can't find any evidence of it being true. I've removed it because it was added nearly two years ago by an anon (User:193.130.125.61) who had gotten a vandalism warning the day before. S/he added nothing else to this article. No source was provided. I can't find any google hits that aren't wiki, wiki mirrors, or sites which refer to wiki or a wiki mirror. I can't find anything on Lexis/Nexis or on the BBC News site. In the absence of any sort of source or proof, I have to reluctantly conclude that this is a hoax. Gamaliel 08:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

The naked motorcycle story is true. The Junior Common Room (the undergraduate student body) of Merton College passed two separate motions to this effect in the early 1980s. As far as I can remember, the second of them was passed in either 1983 or 1984. It may be possible to verify this by contacting the secretary of the JCR - minute books of the time may still be available. Alternatively, it may be that other old Mertonians who were present when the motion was passed (as I was) would like to confirm this by adding to this page. I have not reinstated the reference because of the scepticism of the previous writer and will leave it to others to decide the fate of the text. Miss Worswick
I can also confirm the naked motorcycle story is definitely true. The first motion to this effect was passed by the JCR (the students) in 1980, and requests were made to the College to make funds available for this project. Regrettably, none were forthcoming. I was present during the subsequent debate in 1984, confirming the student opinion, which the College again chose to ignore. I'm not exactly sure how you go about re-instating the text of the article, so I request someone more advance in wiki puts this valid reference back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.168.7.186 (talk • contribs)
Indeed it is a true story. I cannot imagine that minutes of JCR meetings stretch back as far as the early 1980s but if they did the story could be readily confirmed. It might be deemed, though, that this episode, though amusing in its way, is less to do with Kris Kristofferson and more to do with student high-jinks. Galatian 10:19, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
The story certainly is one of student "humour" but that is not concealed, the story is true and the subject of the humour was Kris Kristofferson. I would argue that it is therefore appropriate to reinstate the story. I have done so. Miss Worswick 11:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I've removed the story again. Information included in Wikipedia must be verifiable and sourced. Gamaliel 23:29, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

And notable. FireWorks 06:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
I have just read this comment. I am not disputing the removal of the story from the main page on the grounds that it is not adequately verifiable or sourced but I do feel that the story is notable. The point is moot but, for the record, should acceptable proof of the story surface I would feel justified in restoring it the page. Miss Worswick —Preceding undated comment added 10:32, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Certainly not VERY notable, an attempted sophomoric prank that had no chance whatsoever of succeeding. It's not surprising that no objective, reputable, verifiable source has emerged. Why would one? TheScotch (talk) 22:14, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

David Icke

I added a 'Trivia' section with a note about David Icke's "reptilian agenda" theories concerning Kristofferson. Other Kristofferson fans can flesh-out the section with more mundane trivia. ChildeRolandofGilead 07:59, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Icke's theories do not belong on the Kris Kristofferson page unless they pertain to Kristofferson and are proven. They are not. JG 08:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

How do you prove Kristofferson is a reptilian alien? Anyway, I think this would be a funny and relevant addition, but only if the information is sourced. Gamaliel 09:49, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

It is funny, except for the part accusing Kristofferson of pedophilia. I may think KK is a purple unicorn from Neptune, but that probably shouldn't be added either. JG 10:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Point taken, we can at least agree that the pedophilia stuff should be left out. Gamaliel 10:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Look, if someone is accussed of being reptilian by someone else in the media, it really ought to be mentioned- I mean it's not really an accusation to be taken lightly- for one thing, it would mean he can't produce live young and is cold-blooded. 80.177.170.112

Trivia sections should not be on Wikipedia biographies; any relevant info should be incorporated in relevant sections of the article; most trivia should not be in the article at all. Icke's strange claims should be in Icke's article, but not anywhere else, unless there is good reason for it. Icke is not credible, so accusations from him should not be on articles of the people he has accused of anything. Any claim that Kristofferson is a reptile is clearly false; unsubstantiated accusations against a person should not be on the accused's article. Information yes (talk) 06:48, 23 June 2009 (UTC) 

:Au contraire, Mr. 80...It is indeed "an accusation" "to be taken lightly", precisely because it's nonsensical. TheScotch (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Kris Kristofferson movies

You left out one of my favorites--the all-star TV remake of Stagecoach, as Ringo, with Johnny Cash, June Cash and son, Tony Fransciosa, Willie Nelson, David Allen Coe, Waylon Jennings, John Schneider, etc. etc. etc.!!!152.31.160.126 15:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)Jed Taub

It's DAVID ALLAN COE not Allen.
True, but I know why this happens. Fiction writer Edgar Allan Poe's middle name is sometimes spelled Allen, even in encyclopedias!! That name is damn close to the author's. (purpose, obviously!) -andy 80.129.105.81 18:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

This is my first time doing any editting, so bear with me. I stuck in I'm Not There, the Bob Dylan biography. Kristofferson narrates it, right at the start. Kammerice (talk) 23:26, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't he in the films, "Rollover" and "Miracle in the Wilderness"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.198.119 (talk) 15:05, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

His ancestors were Swedes!

Yes, he told that to the audience on his 2004 live performance in Hultsfred (SWE). The only problem is I have no idea where to put this best in the article. Any suggestions? -andy 80.129.105.81 18:28, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Here is a reference that you may want to use. Hurukan 03:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Sports Illustrated Face in the Crowd?

My wife just mentioned that KK is mentioned in her latest issue of Sports Illustrated's 50 years of Faces in the Crowd issue. Apparently he was a Golden Gloves boxer, in addition to his having been singled out as a Face in the Crowd by SI. It doesn't look like there's any reference to it in his early bio. Is SI verifiable enough? VisibleInk 21:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Two for Texas

Is there any reason that "Two For Texas" isn't mentioned on this page? See http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0135017/ --TimothyJacobson (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Kris da Kommie?

I've watched and listened to this video clip a couple of times and Kristofferson quite plainly, specifically and proudly admits to being a Communist. Of course, this whole textual love fest would be quite ruined if anything caustic were posted about him.

http://www.hulu.com/watch/59844/the-colbert-report-thu-feb-26-2009

These other two links were just evidence that most Rhodes scholars like Kristofferson are at least lefty enough to be Socialists. Hmmm. A pattern, or just a coincidence... http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_108950.html

http://people.howstuffworks.com/13-famous-rhodes-scholars.htm

I just forgot my log in and password. I figured a real posting would just be a hassle. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.13.158.21 (talk) 08:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Anyone else uncomfortable with the amount of passive-aggressive right-wing sneering in this entry? 82.32.160.97 (talk) 16:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Middle name?

Here the info box gives birth name as first and last names, no middle name. IMDb gives a middle name: Kristian. So does somebody have evidence that IMDb is wrong? If so, why has IMDb not been corrected? We can do that too. If not, why is the middle name not given here in Wikipedia? I notice that someone (unnamed, 75.48.164.205) did insert the middle name in the box (2009-01-03T04:31:52) and in the first sentence (2009-01-03T04:33:03) but All Hallow's Wraith undid all that (2009-02-08T07:16:48) as "unsourced". is IMDb not to be trusted? Or did IMDb get it from here? Where did the anonymous 75.48.164.205 get the middle name from if it is untrue? 88.105.80.161 Iph (talk) 12:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC) I added the last bit a few mnutes after the first bit yesterday but today I see that apparently in a window where I wasn't logged in so I'm fixing that now.Iph (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Father

Not sure I'm doing this right as this is my first Wiki entry, but I've been through the help pages and portals and I think it's unbelievable how complicated Wiki has made this website. I just want to report a factual error in Kris Kristofferson's bio. I don't know the correct info, so I can't enter that, but I do know there is a factual error. The bio says his dad was a U.S. Air Force Major General. This is not possible since Kris was born in 1936 and the Air Force was not created until 1947. My guess is that his dad was actually in the Army Air Corps from which the Air Force was born, but I do not know that for a fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.222.2.126 (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

His father was in the US Army Air Corps and the US Air Force. He flew during WWII and Korea according to this interview: http://www.thefader.com/2009/11/05/qa-kris-kristofferson/ Tgpaul58 (talk) 05:42, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Age

I don't think, somehow, that Mr Kristofferson was born in the 1700's. I would rectify this myself but I don't actually know how old he is. --My name is slim Davey 21:39, 26 April 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fred Burma (talk • contribs)

He was born on June 22 1936, making him 72. I too would change it, but I'm not autoconfirmed yet :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tremendosaurus (talk • contribs) 14:41, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Alcolo-Dependace

Some of Kristofferson's songs speak of alcolo-dependance. These include "Sunday Morning" and "Beat the Devil." As Mr Kristofferson himself has raised the subject (by the medium of his songs), should this issue not be considered on Wikipedia?--PeadarMaguidhir (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Whatever goes into an article about a living person has to be supported by reliable secondary sources, per our policy on biographies of living people. We cannot deduce things from song lyrics - I'm fairly sure that Queen had not tied their mothers down, for example, or even done the fandango... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 18:16, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
I'm not even sure what "alcolo-dependance" is, but saying that anyone raised a subject through their songs is speculative at best and a gross WP:BLP at worst. Janis Joplin recorded Me and Bobby McGee, does that mean that either her or Kristofferson were ever busted flat in Baton Rouge? Nah. Wildhartlivie (talk) 18:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

99.71.110.9 (talk) 13:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It's true that many of his songs seem to be written from the point of view of a struggling, active alcoholic. It's reasonable to point that out, IMO. I did find an interview where he talks about past drinking, for what it's worth. I quote:

"By that time he was, like his character, a fully fledged boozehound. "I had a half-gallon of Jose Cuervo in my trailer and they never let it empty. They just kept coming back in and filling it up, same half-gallon bottle. I don't know how much I was drinking, but it was a lot, and I had to quit it soon after. Doctor said my liver was the size of a football and that if I didn't quit, I was gonna kill myself. I had a new little daughter, so I quit. I drink wine today, but at the time I just went cold turkey. It was probably harder on the people around me than on myself." [1] 98.229.4.47 (talk)burgo — Preceding undated comment added 01:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.theguardian.com/music/2008/mar/04/popandrock.folk

This page is about KK, not his kids' wrestling careers!

Removed the stuff about his kids' wrestling careers from the "personal life" section. If someone wants to create pages for them, that's fine, but the info isn't relevant here. 173.249.64.220 (talk) 12:59, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Meeting of Kristofferson and Cash

During a documentary on CMT, both Johnny Cash and Kris Kristofferson spoke of how they first met. Kristofferson was a pilot with the Tennessee National Guard and took a helicopter and landed in Cash's Back yard while Cash and his wife, June Carter were sitting on the porch. Cash said any man who'd land a helicopter in his back yard to get him to listen to his music just had to be listened to.

--184.155.76.155 (talk) 23:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)Sewman1957@yahoo.com

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kris Kristofferson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Chronic Lyme

Kris Kristofferson (or is it his wife) believes he has chronic lyme disease. We can't say this without making clear this is not an acknowledged medical condition; see WP:PSCI. Alexbrn (talk) 03:20, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

On the contrary, my understanding from public reports is that he went untreated for a long time - so this is not controversial at all at this point. The controversial topic is the proper management of a lingering set of nonspecific complaints in people who have already been treated for Lyme disease, and in whom there is no demonstrable infection (some advocate long-term antibiotics, when well-designed clinical trials have not supported that approach). This post-treatment syndrome is not the same as untreated Lyme disease. The terminology is confusing, but untreated symptomatic Lyme disease is a well-established and potentially serious condition that requires treatment (cf. 2006 IDSA Guidelines for treating Lyme Disease PMID 17029130). — soupvector (talk) 00:21, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
As the Gorski piece makes clear, KK has been "diagnosed" (using dubious methods) with this fake disease by various advocates of it (and is now being "treated" with some very dubious things indeed). We cannot say in Wikipedia's voice that he "has" chronic lyme disease because it is not a medically accepted condition - we'd make Wikipedia as credulous as the HuffPo source. Per WP:PSCI when we mention chronic lyme disease we have to be clear that it's dodgy. I shall raise a query at WP:FT/N. Alexbrn (talk) 03:08, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
I do not believe that it is desirable to use Scienceblogs.com as a source for information about a BLP. The HuffPo "blog" source cannot be used at all because it is prohibited by WP:BLPSPS. It isn't a blog post by a news media organization. It's no different from a WordPress blog. It is labeled at the end with this disclaimer: "This post is hosted on the Huffington Post's Contributor platform. Contributors control their own work and post freely to our site. If you need to flag this entry as abusive, send us an email."
Accordingly, I've removed the sentence. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:11, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
That seems a satisfactory solution for now. Alexbrn (talk) 06:13, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
agree w/ WAID per [1]--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:22, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks all - this has been going on for a month. — soupvector (talk) 20:50, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

It looks like User:Truegirl11 is making some progress on figuring out some of Wikipedia's complicated rules. So, congratulations to her (or him). The latest source is to Rolling Stone magazine, which is generally considered a reliable source for claims that a celebrity claims to have a medical condition. Also, to be clear, the source mentions Lyme disease, not Chronic Lyme disease, and that's what Truegirl11 wrote.

Now we should talk about whether it's important enough – in an encyclopedic summary of Kristofferson's life – to mention it at all. (Truegirl11, just click the [Edit] button at the top of this section, scroll down to the end, and type your comments. You can get a "signature", complete with automagic date stamp, by clicking the item in the editing window's blue toolbar, that looks like someone writing with a pen.)

My inclination is not to mention it, because this is the only WP:Reliable source that mentions it, because the mention is relatively brief (about two paragraphs in a long article), and because it's not desirable for an article about a musician to have a catalog of medical conditions. The same source mentions multiple medical things: traumatic brain injuries, substance abuse problems, heart bypass surgery, Alzheimer's (now disclaimed by his wife), and memory loss. I'm sure that if we did a serious search, we could find even more: perhaps bad knees or lower back pain from wrestling and the military? weak lungs from smoking? occasional pre-cancerous spots that need removing (people with his coloring have a higher incidence)?

It's not clear to me why either the memory loss (announced in 2013, with a different source) or the Lyme disease diagnosis should be mentioned, much less why they should be the only ones mentioned. It doesn't feel like it helps anyone understand what makes him notable. It just feels like trivia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:25, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Completely agree - I saw the new addition and left it alone (since the source had improved) to allow others to consider this question of notability in a BLP. I'm inclined to leave out a medical condition without more compelling evidence from reliable sources that this is notable. I agree that the edit is much better than what preceded, and would be happy to have Truegirl11 participate in this discussion (and as a constructive WP editor generally). — soupvector (talk) 15:48, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

If someone was diagnosed with cancer, it would be left alone on here. His doctor confirmed his Lyme with a blood test and clinical diagnoses. This was a big impact on his life and the family believed this saved his life. I feel this is peoples personal beliefs that Lyme doesn't exist that are in play, rather then facts. I'm trying to adhere to all the rules on here and are still being faulted. I would appreciate if people left this up, because I'm following all the rules on here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 19:20, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

On the contrary - I have no doubt at all that Lyme disease is an important health problem; e.g., near the top of this section I said "my understanding from public reports is that he went untreated for a long time - so this is not controversial at all at this point." The issue here is that Wikipedia must represent the degree of notability as represented in reliable sources, guided by the context of a biography of a living person. WhatamIdoing has rightly asked whether reliable sources have emphasized this diagnosis sufficiently to warrant coverage in an encyclopedia, and the coverage is indeed scant at this point. No one is displaying bias against any particular diagnosis - they're just following policy and discussing. Very glad you're engaged, and let's see how this settles out as others weigh in. There's no deadline - this is an encyclopedia, not a news medium. — soupvector (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Truegirl11, thanks for joining us for a chat!
As it happens, I've personally pulled unsourced claims about cancer from multiple articles about living people, so, no, it wouldn't necessarily have been left alone. Also, "cancer" is a broad class of things, and the most common type (the non-melanoma skin cancers) is normally a quite unimportant disease. However, I recognize the justice of what you're saying: people who don't know any better tend to over-react to the word "cancer" and under-react to any type of non-sexually transmitted infection.
But, no matter how true that is in the real world, Wikipedia articles aren't really based on the "impact on his life". They're based on what reliable sources care about, as demonstrated by what the sources write about. So far, the reliable sources seem to care more about his heart bypass surgery (for example, [2][3][4][5]) and alcoholism (for example, [6][7][8]) than about his Lyme diagnosis (one source, which spends more time talking about the bypass surgery and alcoholism).
In the real world, these are all medical conditions that affected his life, and I'm sure that his family and fans are grateful that he didn't die of heart disease or complications of addiction, just like they're grateful that he's feeling better now. But in Wikipedia terms, we'd have to give more attention to the medical conditions that the sources care the most about, which isn't the Lyme diagnosis.
And in human terms, with some respect for his privacy, I can't support cramming in a list of medical conditions just so we can justify mentioning this one. I think it's better to leave out things like the bypass surgery, even though there were entire articles written about that. This can be justified under Wikipedia's content policies, because he's not notable for "being sick" (unlike Terry Fox, for example). Kristofferson is notable for music and acting. We probably can't leave out the alcoholism, because sources have connected that to his song lyrics, but I think we can omit the rest and let him (hopefully) recover in peace. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:37, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

There's a section in there that says, "In November 2013 Kristofferson revealed that he had suffered from memory loss for several years." Why is discussing that health issue on his page ok and mine not? Respectfully disagree that we should only put conditions that sources care about. It should be telling the whole truth about a subject, not what we think people want to hear. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 05:39, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm thinking that we should kill the memory loss bit, too. In fact, I'll do that now, so everyone can see what I think it should look like. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:30, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Given the cautions around biographies of living persons, and the limited coverage of this topic in reliable sources, I think WAID's caution is appropriate. Let's see how coverage develops and if this becomes a prominent story in reliable sources, the argument for inclusion will be stronger. — soupvector (talk) 11:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

The memory loss has been up there forever, until I mentioned it. While mine was immediately swarmed on. I also can go onto his page right now and there's a lot of citation needed in spots, bad sources and everyone leaves that alone. I'm following all the rules, so I would appreciate if it was left alone. His life achievements is also not defined by divorce and it's on there. Stuff like divorce and Lyme Disease are up there because it's in the section about personal life. We're supposed to write about what's going on his his personal life. If I wrote about Lyme Disease in his musical career section, then I would understand it's not relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 05:56, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

We really are NOT "supposed to write about what's going on his his personal life" - what we ARE supposed to do is create an encyclopedia that accurately represents coverage in reliable sources - which is the criterion we've been discussing. If there are other things that seem improper, either in terms of sourcing or emphasis, then those should be fixed too but they don't alter the current discussion. — soupvector (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Then Why have a personal life section if you can't talk about his personal life? That doesn't make sense to me. I have been trying very hard to follow the rules that you have laid out. This seems more like a personal choice that you don't want it up there, then the rules. There's nothing rule breaking of what I have up on there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
I wasn't very clear in my first sentence - what I meant to say was that our goal is to cover what reliable sources cover, with similar emphasis (rather than keeping current for its own sake, which is why I linked the first part of that first sentence to WP:NOTNEWS). So, if reliable sources were to demonstrate significant coverage of Lyme, for example, then that would be appropriate here. — soupvector (talk) 19:03, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining that, that I do get. I also feel Rolling Stone is a reliable source. I'm not trying to be a pain. I just want to tell information as a whole and not have big holes in the story. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 06:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

The only reason it's being included at all is that Rolling Stone is a reliable source; however, that article only briefly mentions Lyme, and there is no other significant coverage of this story in reliable sources - when you think of all the reliable sources that could cover this, it makes one wonder whether our coverage here might be undue weight - since our mandate is to represent the coverage in those sources, collectively. — soupvector (talk) 12:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I just feel that the only way stuff gets left up on here is if it's popular and on the news, instead of explaining the whole story. To me that's not very educational and completely biased. It makes me distrust what's on here, because it's heavily censored and only shows a few viewpoints. This isn't directed at you, more at the wikipedia community as a whole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry you feel that way, because I think it's clear why we rely on the coverage of reliable sources - that's the nature of an encyclopedia. If the sources are biased (and I think we all agree that there are systemic biases for western European viewpoints, for example) then we will be subject to similar biases. That said, though, it's better than leaving it to the whims of the editors here. While editors' whims do affect what they add or remove, the crowd-sourced nature of WP allows a community-balanced trend toward accurate representation of reliable sources. This only works if we get LOTS of editors - so I hope you'll stay engaged and contribute broadly. There are so many topics - try some that you know are notable and verifiable but aren't covered well here, and I think you'll find that it becomes more comfortable. You clearly are knowledgeable and articulate - so you have a lot to offer. — soupvector (talk) 20:57, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but I'll probably not contribute much after this. I shouldn't have to to choose a less controversial subject so it doesn't get censored. If someone follows all the rules, it should be left alone. Thanks for taking the time to explain this for me, but I'm left feeling very disheartened from the wikipedia process. Again this is not directed at you, but wikipedia as a whole. Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Truegirl11 (talk • contribs) 02:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
I wish you the best, and I am sorry you're frustrated. I think the "censorship" characterization is inaccurate; we're just following the well-established rules that we have cited here. I hope you'll stay and contribute - this is the world's encyclopedia. If you'd like to consult with other editors, please consider visiting the tea house. — soupvector (talk) 03:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kris Kristofferson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Fraternity membership

This page said that he was a member of Delta Kappa fraternity at Ponoma College. According to the college's website there is no organization at the school by that name, but there is a Kappa Delta local fraternity there. I assume that the letters got crossed in an edit. I didn't see anything in the reference to say he was a member though. Here is a link to the local fraternity: https://claremont.collegiatelink.net/organization/kappadelta/about

A list of old greek organizations at Ponoma is here: https://www.pomona.edu/administration/archives/blog/posts/13-11-21-Greek-Life

Also, be careful not to confuse the local fraternity with Kappa Delta national sorority. Gooseneck41 (talk) 13:39, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

First Paragraph

At the beginning...in the lead...not the lede...it says he is a singer songwriter and a musician...isn`t that a bit redundant? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BD95:45F0:29DD:7A9D:C5DF:8A4B (talk) 03:15, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kris Kristofferson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:04, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Info on Jesus Was a Capricorn?

Does anyone know of any sources that give more information on Jesus Was a Capricorn? I love that album but it seems underappreciated. Would love to expand its entry. Tactical Fiend (talk) 18:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Lyme Disease Discussion -- Revisited.

After having inserted the WP link for Lyme Disease, I just found the lengthy exchange on how to handle this information. My main suggestion here is to (a) Accept the the WP link as just added OR (b) Rephrase this paragraph OR (c) Just remove it and be done with it.

Essentially, this consideration of a link should NOT hinge on issues like privacy, quality of source, a diagnosis of "Lyme Disease" versus "Chronic Lyme disease", the confusion of the misdiagnosis, the extent or nature of his medical issues, quality of life issues, or medical bias. Those are all factors influencing the consideration of *content* to remain. (I'm keeping out of the discussion of whether the article should have that information.)

My single point is: If WP editors believe that this information merits inclusion, then retain this information. However, if not, it should be removed. ...The solution should NOT be leaving it as is currently phrased without a WP link to "Lyme Disease." Gprobins (talk) 22:04, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

Barbra Streisand

This is a VERY minor point. Under "associated acts", Barbra Streisand's name is misspelled. She was named "Barbara" at birth, but changed it. That fact is well-known, since she made much of it. - Barbara (not Barbra) Yvonne Maxwell Myboo127 (talk) 13:59, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Number of Children

The linked source for his children is a bad link and nothing I can find mentions the 9th child “from his time as a helicopter pilot in Germany.” Source? 2601:405:4A80:43E0:D12D:F201:8B9E:4BE1 (talk) 04:41, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Unreliable Lyme claims

I reverted medical claims not supported by reliable medical sources. There has been discussion on Kristofferson's treatment by unreliable practitioners on this talk page. David Gorski calls Kristofferson the "latest celebrity quackery victim".

There is no source I've seen supporting a claim that "In 2006, Kristofferson was diagnosed with Lyme disease". Additionally, the "functional medicine" doctor (who works for Amen Clinics and who is not a neurologist) who diagnosed Kristofferson admits the initial Lyme testing was negative and his "treatment" started in 2016. Experts found no good evidence to support claims that Lyme disease causes Alzheimer's. Experts also agree "Immunoglobulin G (IgG) seronegativity in an untreated patient with months to years of symptoms essentially rules out the diagnosis of Lyme disease, barring laboratory error or a rare humoral immunodeficiency state." ScienceFlyer (talk) 04:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Retronymster Thank you for your good faith efforts to improve this article. However, I still see no reliable medical source for your continued reverts. You write Brought back edit that ScienceFlyer deleted due to false reasoning that CBS News is an unreliable source.

I did not say that CBS News was an unreliable source. However, the particular article is churnalism and relies entirely on reporting by Rolling Stone and British tabloid Closer magazine. Additionally, all my criticisms above still stand. As I wrote on your talk page: Where is there any source saying he was diagnosed with Lyme disease in 2006? Where is any reliable medical source saying he had Lyme disease at all? Where is any reliable medical source supporting that long-term memory loss is caused by Lyme disease? ScienceFlyer (talk) 16:04, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kris_Kristofferson/Archive_1&oldid=1239868556"