|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
- Created one... since the group continued touring without Frankie, and still does, I thought it was appropriate. 188.8.131.52 02:45, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
This has to be one of the most informative, concise and professionally written entries I have read yet on Wikipedia. Please keep up the great work. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:25, 31 January 2007 (UTC).
Facts in the movie
Did Lyman, in fact, actually kill his wife/girlfriend's dog or is that a bit of Hollywood hype? I could not find any reference to that in any biography. IrishAirWolf 21:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not unless he was criminally convicted of bigamy. WP does not categorize people according to marital status. See Category talk:American bigamists. Rich Uncle Skeleton 06:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you quote some actual rules? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 07:00, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- I don't believe there's a rule that says we don't categorize by marital status, but it just doesn't happen. Do we have categories of people who have been divorced, or people who have married three times, or people who are part of a same-sex partnership? The category Category:Polygamists was deleted HERE—as some mention in this discussion, the implicit assumption with Category:Bigamists is quite different, in that a criminal conviction for the crime of bigamy is involved. For other evidence of this assumption, see the old CFD for Category:Bigamists HERE. You're trying to apply the category of "Bigamists" in the way the category of "Polygamists" USED to be applied. I know, I know, polygamy and bigamy are not the same, but the Bigamy category was kept with the assumption that it would be used to categorize those convicted of bigamy. Hence its inclusion as a subcategory of Category:Criminals.
- All this being said, I'm happy to nominate Category:Bigamists and its subs for deletion if you are intent on applying it in this way. We'll see what the consensus is. Rich Uncle Skeleton 08:55, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
It cannot be that Lymon's first marriage was a "common law marriage". There is no such thing in New York state as a legal "common law" marriage". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
- There may be no such thing in New York's legislation, but there is in the English language. It means they were cohabiting. Skinsmoke (talk) 07:17, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Lymon moved into his wife's home and continued to perform sporadically.