Jump to content

Talk:Rumer (musician)

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

Bacharach EP

[edit]

She has a new EP of songs written by Burt Bacharach coming out shortly. Heard one of the songs on Smooth Radio this morning. Not sure what the EP is called. The presenter did name it, but I've forgotten. We'll need to include the information on this when it becomes available. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:18, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not an EP as such (which usually has 4 tracks). I would suggest moving this entry to the Singles Section. The two tracks are "Some Lovers" (written by Bacharach, Sater) and "Alfie" (written by Bacharach, David). It was a CD single as well as a 7".JPGRAmpersandB (talk) 13:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, found something on her official YouTube channel. The EP is called "Rumer Sings Bacharach at Christmas", and is a collaboration with Bacharach and US playwright Steven Sater. It will be released on 13 December and features "Alfie" and a new Bacharach composition, "Some Lovers". It will be released on limited edition 7" vinyl and for download. TheRetroGuy (talk) 20:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ta, I'll look out for that. :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Am I Forgiven?

[edit]

What's the situation with Am I FOrgiven? Has it been released as a single and did it get into the charts? Smooth Radio play it a lot which suggests to me it has, but I've Googled for a chart position and don't seem t get anything significant back. I asked at the Refdesk but nobody seems to know and I think we should add it if it was released. Cheers TheRetroGuy (talk) 21:26, 3 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it on the BBC radio in East Anglia, but I'm unsure of its status as a single release. I've been overseas for a whilst so I haven't been radio listening for a month. I'll have to research it later, I'm a bit tired atm. Feel free to add any reffed data you find though. :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm kinda puzzled too, it's mentioned on the diary of updates on her website as being her 3rd single, released 25th January [[1]], even mentioning an itunes link, but on that itunes page there is no listing of it as a single, or EP, but only as an album track and having looked elsewhere (HMV, Amazon), there is no cd single release either, although a promo video for it is up on youtube. And yet on this wiki entry, "Goodbye Girl" (which is getting airplay on radio 2 this week) is listed as the 3rd single from the album. Andrew07 (talk) 01:49, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier material

[edit]

I don't see very much mention of the earlier material that she did, she also had a backing band called The Denials, with whom she recorded earlier versions of "Slow" and "Come To Me High" in 2007 [2], but the myspace page for them is now gone. She also released an album "Coffee And Honey" under her real name of Sarah Joyce, but only in South Korea. I found all this info here [3], but do you think maybe Rumer is trying to distance herself from her earlier work? Andrew07 (talk) 21:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good work in finding those references; the BBC page is still there so you could certainly use it in the article. The Blogspot reference isn't suitable for WP, but interesting nonetheless. Also, I wouldn't mention 'distancing herself from earlier work' unless you can reference it. Thanks for the links though. :-) Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:35, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence of "Earlier material" is practically a duplicate of the first sentence of the intro.Fgtbell (talk) 18:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a section titled 'Earlier material'. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:31, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Rumer (musician). 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) 08:34, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rumer (musician). 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) 05:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 24 September 2017

[edit]
The proposed image in its current form

Please please please can this new photograph that I own (and I am giving away freely in terms of copyright etc etc) replace the current photograph in the top right of this page. I have amended the description of my photograph with as much info as I can to help with this, if there is anything further that I can do to help make this change please explain and given me clear guidance on where to go and what to do to achieve this, Thanks so much, ... ELOJeff (talk) 16:26, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest that if you own the copyright to this blurred image you follow the advice on your talkpage on Wiki commons and go through the consent route via OTRS?--Egghead06 (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent an email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org asking to use my own photograph at File:Rumer at the Warwick Arts Centre, 23 February 2015.jpg

In the meantime could I ask you with great respect to remove the image you have posted back in its place until such time that your image can be replaced. Many many thanks, it would really be appreciated. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 17:42, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. The current image is illustrative of the subject of this encyclopedia article, and the subject's dislike of it is insufficient grounds for its removal. However, you are free to develop a more compelling rationale if you like. (Reopening this request is not necessary for discussion to continue.) RivertorchFIREWATER 17:53, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This new image which I would like to add is a much more recent photograph and more true of Rumer's likeness, it has movement and expression and colour that is I believe of greater ambience and composition than the old photo from 2011. I would be grateful if the Warwick photo from 2015 now be used if possible. Thanks. Could an editor please revert this change if in agreement. Kind regards. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 23:59, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In fact the one I have now managed to add would be even better as it has been cropped to remove a slightly blurred hand (kindly cropped and added for me by another editor) and this I think fits/suits even better within the thumbnail box in the top right of the page, potentially anyway. I hope some can/will agree. File:Rumer at the Warwick Arts Centre, 23 February 2015 (cropped).jpg ELOJeff10538 (talk) 00:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both images are of poor quality and angels, however the image that has been in the article is the better of the two. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:35, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello FlightTime, The image I have added looks fine here, and I think the angle (I guess you meant angle) also looks good from here. I have a higher res version of the uncropped one if that helps. But as far as I can tell on my laptop the image I have re-added today really does look ok. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 00:39, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: Please keep the discussion here and not on my talk page. To answer you questions, anyone can join the discussion and to be fair, all inforamtion about consensus diasussions can be found here Wikipedia:Consensus - FlightTime (open channel) 01:05, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks FlightTime, I have put in another edit request for the new photograph. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: STOP making new edit requests, nothing is going to change until the orignal discussion is resolved. If you continue you're just going to get blocked. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:17, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I've added some images to commons:Category:Rumer (musician), so there are choices here. ELOJeff10538, if you upload more Rumer photos, please add them to the category so they're easy to find and choose from. —Guanaco 01:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you User:Guanaco, unfortunately the Rumer page has been put back into protected mode again so I cannot do anything or try to suggest the newest images. Is there anyway you could unprotect the page again so that progress can be made? ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:20, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: I haven't been able to unprotect articles since 2006 (long story). But if I could, it would be against policy. All we can do here is discuss and try to come to some agreement about which image to use. —Guanaco 01:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks again. could you add my higher res version of the file I want to use to the category page as I cannot figure out how to do that. The higher res version is at https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Rumer_in_concert_at_Warwick_Arts_Centre%2C_UK_-_23_February_2015.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Rumer_in_concert_at_Warwick_Arts_Centre%2C_UK_-_23_February_2015.jpg ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:26, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: Just so you know, you are the reason for the page being locked again, changing a page to your preferred version (re-adding your image) before a consensus discussion is resolved is disruptive. - FlightTime (open channel) 01:27, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry FlightTime but I thought the dispute was because ownership of my photo had not been proven (see above), now that I have proven it, I thought I was free to use it here. Permission was granted via ticket 2017092410012304 on wiki commons. I did not realise there had to be another committee style concensus reached to change a photo over now that my ownership and validity had been granted. How do I progress swapping to the now approved (legally) photo. who can agree to this for me? Thanks ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:32, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: The key point which must be discussed is "Which image best illustrates Rumer, the topic of the article?" I'll quote the Wikipedia:image use policy: "The purpose of an image is to increase readers' understanding of the article's subject matter, usually by directly depicting people, things, activities, and concepts described in the article. The relevant aspect of the image should be clear and central."
My preferred solution would be to get a recent professional photo (with permission) for the main infobox. Then we could move the concert photos down to the yearly album sections, throughout the article. —Guanaco 01:40, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

yes Guanaco, of course. I was just trying to swap over one photo to another but I realise now that this may be not be simply achievable along such basic lines. Maybe its just not possible in the simple terms as I had hoped. I think the new images better represent Rumer and are more current than the 2011 one, but if it really is not acceptable/feasible/allowed to make this change I don't know what more I can do now ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@FlightTime: This is the photograph/image I would like to swap to if possible, if you could help in reaching agreement with this that would be great. File:Rumer_in_concert_at_Warwick_Arts_Centre,_UK_-_23_February_2015_(cropped).jpg ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Or in fact if preferred the one that was up before the old one from 2011 was re-instated. I don't mind either. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 01:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As by your own words, the artist is a friend of yours, could you not request from her the use of a very recent and professionally produced image that could be used?--Egghead06 (talk) 05:07, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We are happy with my amateur shot (I do not believe the current photo that has been used thus far is a professional shot), it doesn't necessarily have to be a professional shot to bring the current photo being used up to date etc etc. In fact I have just loaded an even more recent outdoor shot from a concert this year, could this one be considered please instead perhaps?

I took this photograph on 16 June 2017 at a concert at the Westonbirt Arboretum, South Gloucestershire England - UK, and later manipulated it to create the final image. I own this photograph and everything about it; it is not a copyright violation to load it here and I offer it free to anyone who wants to use it - at any time.

Here is the URL for it too, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rumer_at_Westonbirt_Arboretum,_16_June_2017.jpg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/Rumer_at_Westonbirt_Arboretum%2C_16_June_2017.jpg Perhaps a consensus could be reached to use this oneELOJeff10538 (talk) 07:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC) Hi, Guanaco. I don't have the original photo due to space constraints, yes some might think it to be over processed but I wouldn't necessarily agree. Still a nicer and more up to date image than the 2011 one I think when all is said and done. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 09:00, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've lost track of what we are trying to decide but......personally FWIW, I prefer the image from the Westonbirt concert.--Egghead06 (talk) 09:39, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You and me both! See the new section I started below. —C.Fred (talk) 19:30, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Egghead06, this Westonbirt one - if you think better than my other suggestion(s) would be fine too if agreeable ; all we were trying to decide on was an alternative really. So that's great and fine by me. If you would be kind enough to maybe use the Westonbirt concert photograph on the page now, this would be really nice. It is much more up to date given that it was taken in only June 2017. Perhaps more representative now too. If you are content to swap to the image this would be fantastic, thanks in advance if so. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 10:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't just change it as other editors have decided consensus must be reached....watch this space!--Egghead06 (talk) 15:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 26 September 2017

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please could this image be used instead on the top right of this page? It is a more current photograph and has more movement and colour and ambience and is more evocative of Rumer in concert. Thanks. File:Rumer at the Warwick Arts Centre, 23 February 2015 (cropped).jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Guanaco#/media/File:Rumer_at_the_Warwick_Arts_Centre,_23_February_2015_(cropped).jpg ELOJeff10538 (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2017 (UTC) ELOJeff10538 (talk) 00:07, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 00:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Thank you to whomever changed the protection level, ref above I have now managed to change the picture to the new one again and hope all agree it is more current, fitting and representative etc etc and can now stay. Thanks user Nihlus Kryik, much appreciated. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 00:34, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: Why are you starting a new request for the same thing ? - FlightTime (open channel) 00:36, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: The discussion for this action is ongoing in the section above. - FlightTime (open channel) 00:40, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Protected edit request on 26 September 2017

[edit]

Hello, I would like to offer a further alternative photograph to the one being used from 2011, in the top right of this page. This one or my earlier suggestions from Warwick Arts centre would be I think a more up to date and more representative and contemporary photograph. This one was taken in June 2017 so is much more current than one from 5-6 years ago now. I hope this edit / change can be approved. Many thanks.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/Rumer_at_Westonbirt_Arboretum%2C_16_June_2017.jpg

Rumer at Westonbirt Arboretum, 16 June 2017

ELOJeff10538 (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2017 (UTC) ELOJeff10538 (talk) 10:33, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit protected}} template. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rebooting the image discussion

[edit]

The prior discussion had gotten so fragmented that I'm going to start a new section to try to refocus. The core issue is the image appearing in the article's infobox. There appear to be three options currently proposed (all scaled at 150px so they can be seen side-by-side):

Status quo New image A New image B New image C

If I'm understanding prior discussion, one of the key objections to new image B is the composition, with the shadows of the microphone looking awkward around her hand, so I'm going to lay that one aside.

Thus, my questions are as follows: (1) Is new image A an improvement in image quality over the status quo? It's a newer image, and it provides as clear if not a clearer view of the subject's face. (2) Is there any policy-based reason to prefer the status quo image over new image A? I'm trying to identify any hurdles to be cleared, as I don't think copyright provenance is an issue. —C.Fred (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The old photo is now 6 years old approx and really IMHO no longer represents a contemporary or current image of Rumer. The Warwick Arts Centre cropped photo is the one I favour of the new proposed photos. While not technically perfect, it has movement and emotion and colour that more accurately reflects the ambiance of a Rumer concert or performance, and I have attended many as a fan of her music since 2010. I think it is time for a change. ... and time to bring the photo used here a little more in line with Rumer as portrayed in her live shows and with colours (light and shade) that reflect both her music and perhaps some of the colours used in art work on her album art (for example the Into Colour album artwork, while lighter than the colours in the Warwick photo, it is perhaps a little similar). Additionally, the current photo features only one side of Rumer's face and I think the front-on aspect is an improvement on the existing shot. I hope other editors can conclude it is time to change the existing photo anyway. Copyright provenance has been proved for the Warwick photo via ticket 2017092410010262. Best wishes to all ELOJeff10538 (talk) 21:37, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd choose image A. It's clearer and less arty and more suitable for an encyclopedia. B is blurred, the colours are poorly defined and it is very shadowy. --Egghead06 (talk) 07:16, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, lets go with thew new image A over the current "status quo" image. How soon can the change be made? Can another editor do this now? ELOJeff10538 (talk) 13:34, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I say let's stay with the Status quo. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:29, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@FlightTime: Is there a particular issue with the image composition or a matter of Wikipedia policy that makes you say to stay with status quo? —C.Fred (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred: Well, I feel File:Rumer2011.jpg is the best out of the three. A second choice I could go with is File:Rumer Joyce singer.jpg - FlightTime (open channel) 19:56, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ELOJeff10538: A day is a little quick for discussion. We'll need to wait a bit longer and see what other editors have to say. —C.Fred (talk) 19:44, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The status quo image is the best of the 3? Oh come on, somebody here is being deliberately and willfully obstructive because as clearly for some bizarre inexplicable reason they don't want the existing photo changed. The existing photo - its nasty, its blurry and its literally the worst photo on the entire planet. If you don't wish to see one of my suggestions here please at least go for another one as soon as poss. Maybe even the 2010 one File:Rumer Joyce singer.jpg that has now been suggested by FlightTime altho I note that is already present further down the page so you would have to find a replacement for that also; maybe the Warwick or Arboretum shots there instead if the File:Rumer Joyce singer.jpg one ends up at the top? ELOJeff10538 (talk) 20:18, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Status quo before B but rather A.--Egghead06 (talk) 21:27, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Egghead06, I would be very happy with New Image A being used to update this page, is there a time period required or a number of votes needed? There seems to be little bit of a consensus growing perhaps for New Image A, which is nice. Any further thoughts anyone? ELOJeff10538 (talk) 17:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a cropped version of the 2010 professional photo as option C. The crop can be adjusted if there are objections, but the original has too much empty space to the side for an infobox image. However, I'd probably prefer to place this image somewhere else in the article, where it talks about her career seven years ago. —Guanaco 18:09, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Guan I agree that this new Image C would be good somewhere else in the article but would not object if it was the one used for the new top right photograph. Cheers, ELOJeff10538 (talk) 13:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See ongoing new discussion below regarding swapping out the 2011 Birmingham Symphony Hall picture with one from 2014 going into the 2014 part of the musical career section - this makes more sense (also) as the time period matches Rumer's release of the Into Colour album. Any input or consensus on this v gratefully received ELOJeff10538 (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A new request - Birmingham Symphony Hall photo swap.

[edit]

Hi folks. Thanks for the change to the main page photo top right. As I note that the old Symphony Hall photo from 2011 has been moved to the lower portion of the Wiki article, I have been rummaging through my collection to find a more up to date and I think nicer photo than the existing Symphony Hall one from 2011.

The new one I would like to propose instead of the 2011 one in the body of the page is as follows, could this one go lower down it its place instead. Any thoughts? Its from the same venue of course if that helps.

Rumer at Birmingham Symphony Hall, December 2014

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2d/Rumer_at_Birmingham_Symphony_Hall%2C_December_2014.jpg https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File%3ARumer_at_Birmingham_Symphony_Hall%2C_December_2014.jpg

And thank you to user Guanaco for swapping the main photo over earlier.

ELOJeff10538 (talk) 16:10, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ELOJeff10538: How many discussions ( I count six) do need to change one damn image ? - FlightTime (open channel) 16:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think this new image is better than the one in the infobox. Can we put this one in the box instead?--Egghead06 (talk) 16:32, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay lets have my new image of today in the info box and have the one that is there now swapped with the lower down old symphony hall one ELOJeff10538 (talk) 16:36, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, as there seems to be no objection to the above, is it now okay to swap the images as requested above. Or do I need to complete an edit request to achieve this? Just trying to be better at doing this and getting the process right. If okay I think I can edit myself to do this, if needs be. Thanks all, ELOJeff10538 (talk) 13:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The one currently in the box does not belong to the time period where the existing BSH image is placed?--Egghead06 (talk) 14:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very fair point Egghead06 I concur, - okay lets leave the top right box where it is and instead, how about we instead just swap the new 2014 Birmingham Symphony Hall photo in place of the 2011 one. That would work. What does everyone think of that idea? ELOJeff10538 (talk) 07:21, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And just to add to the case here for the above, I really don't think the 2010 and 2011 photos go well together. ELOJeff10538 (talk) 07:37, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The 2011 image at BSH is next to a paragraph of text relates to that period. This does not include 2014 when the newer 2014 was taken.--Egghead06 (talk) 04:12, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but it does, what you are saying there is not true - there are several 'years' in that overall musical career section. There is a reference to 2014 in said overall musical career section - and so the new 2014 Symphony Hall photo can go along side it in the 2014 source box - that was obviously my intention. Clearly what I am saying is the 2011 photo would be removed from the 2011 section and the 2014 photo is put in the 2014 section. How hard can this be!! This will also nicely break up the display of photos in the overall musical career paras. It will fit appropriately against the Into Colour related text. Any views from anyone else at all? 14:50, 5 October 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ELOJeff10538 (talk • contribs)

Why remove the 2011 image at all if you plan to add the 2014 image next to the section which covers 2014? Is it just a case of WP:IJUSTDONTLIKEIT?--Egghead06 (talk) 15:56, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes, as has been mentioned before it is a horrible picture and my proposal improves the page as well - do you have a better photo from 2011 that you could use instead perhaps, that would be a great compromise and improvement too perhaps, surely?? ... ELOJeff10538 (talk) 06:48, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rumer_(musician)&oldid=1215117623"