Talk:Steve Hogarth
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Link
[edit]The link to 'The Europeans' does not link to a band page.
Relevant sources say it's 1959, and 1956 is unsourced information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doxent (talk • contribs) 10:55, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
- [1] User:86.139.9.221 changed this back on 13 May 2006, but as the standard of content for Wikipedia is Verifiability and not Truth, and considering that the sources given show his birthday to be in 1959, I've reverted back to the verifiable information. If we can get a couple reliable sources that contradict this, something can be done, but for now 1959 will have to do. ~Kylu (u|t) 04:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
- I feel that 1959 is the best date to use on Wikipedia. Those sources certainly do support 1959, but I'm not convinced that they trump the data from Marillion.com. [8], [9], [10] are the same article. That doesn't invalidate it, but we shouldn't infer that repetition of this nature is significant. We have no way of knowing the provenance of 1956 in this piece. [11] is a fan-produced FAQ, and whilst it does indeed claiim 1956, this claim is not sourced, and therefore credibility is somewhat lacking. [12] repeats 1956 but also implies Hogarth sasng on Clutching at Straws. Credibility therefore not exactly great.
- Meanwhile [13] states 1959, and the bloke's own website must surely carry more authority? I would therefore argue that 1959 is the best fit for the Wikipedia requirements. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.27.254.79 (talk) 16:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC).
- Actually, the band website now says 1956 [14]. Steve Hogarth admitted at Marillion Weekend Leicester that he was 60 (at that point), and told the story as to how he came to be 3 years younger on the "record" after he first joined the band.
This article requires some sort of Wiki intervention to stop the repeated amendment of the DOB. It currently features a link to a reference that supports 1959, but where the reference itself has been deleted. The current ascertation is unreferenced.
In May 2020 Hogarth said in a podcast that he had just turned 64, not 61 as many thought. The Corona Diaries Chapter 4, including a discussion of Hogarth's recent birthday celebration. Binksternet (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- "Steve Hogarth The Corona Diaries Chapter 4". Retrieved 26 May 2020.
- That is all and well, but there are many reliable sources which give 1959 as the birth year. I would suggest that the article should quote both years, with a footnote describing the differences in sources. That might avoid another repeat of ping-pong edits changing between the two years, ad infinitum. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 22:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
Why the lower-case "h"?
[edit]Any particular reason why Hogarth chooses to do this? 81.158.1.233 (talk) 02:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'd say artistic licence. For more details, ask here: http://www.marillion.com/help/contact.htm. Wikipedia isn't the right place for this. Jimmy Fleischer (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2009 (UTC)