Talk:Badfinger

; Archives
	1

Badfinger is currently a Music good article nominee. Nominated by andreasegde (talk) at 18:53, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer.

Biography: Musicians B‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance).

The Beatles B‑class High‑importance

This Apple Records/Apple Corps-related article is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Wikipedia. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles articles

B This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

For WikiProject The Beatles

A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles.
Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article
Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs
Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood.
Verify : Beatle wives
Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here.

This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

GA

I am now working on this to bring it up to GA status.--andreasegde (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, you've been busy. I'm happy you fixed the lead regarding Evans discovering Ham's body. It's actually a confusing scenario and it could almost go either way.

Although the body was actually discovered by Ham's live-in girlfriend, Anne, she may not have comprehended what she saw. She immediately telephoned Evans. She was hysterical and he only recalled her screaming "It's Pete! It's Pete!" Evans didn't know what this meant. So he drove over to Ham's residence and ran through his house and found no one. He then ventured into the garage and found Ham's body (Anne was apparently in a back room of the house somewhere). Alone with the body, Evans checked his pulse, verified he was dead, and cut him down (although the police and coroner's office likely disapproved of that). At any rate, although Evans didn't "discover" the body, he spent some time alone with it before the police arrived. Evans' widow pointed to this as having a powerful effect on him.-- ZincOrbie (talk) 00:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They really were a doomed band.--andreasegde (talk) 07:51, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's getting closer to a GA. Just a slight problem with book pages.--andreasegde (talk) 15:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nice. Perhaps we can police it for a while and try to keep it from becoming a mess again.-- ZincOrbie (talk) 02:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've got it on my watchlist.--andreasegde (talk) 10:43, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm putting it up for a GA review now.--andreasegde (talk) 18:52, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speechless

A financial statement prepared by Polley's accountants, Sigmund Balaban & Co., for the period between 8 December 1970 to 31 October 1971, showed Polley's income from the band: "Salaries and advances to client, $8,339 (Joey Molland), $6,861 (Mike Gibbins), $6,211 (Tom Evans), $5,959 (Pete Ham). Net corporation profit, $24,569. Management commission, $75,744 (Stan Polley)". Although it is not known if the band members saw the statement, Collins certainly had, as his handwriting is on the document.

Jesus H. Christ...--andreasegde (talk) 12:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes. This goes back to my position stated here (years ago) that much of what Polley was alleged to have stolen was actually contracted to him. A case can certainly be made that it was theft on moral grounds, but his take was essentially legal per contract.

By the way, I see you have elevated a link to Joey Molland's website as being an "official" link. He really is no more "official" than the estates of the deceased members who take umbrage with him, or (as example) that Roger Waters is any more "official" for Pink Floyd than the estates of Syd Barrett or Rick Wright are. I propose changing the title to reflect Molland's involvement, remove the "official" tag, and place it accordingly in the list sequence.-- ZincOrbie (talk) 16:34, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Go for it. BTW, George Martin once suggested that EMI give The Beatles a higher royalty rate, for "nothing" in return. He was then considered an outcast and almost a traitor by EMI staff.--andreasegde (talk) 16:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I also moved the Biography Book site to the top since that is the most heavily-referenced source among the links. It seemed appropriate. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Evans Myth

I removed a sentence regarding Evans leaving a suicide note. No note was found by family, friends or police in the aftermath of Evans death. The "you're next" line is simply a myth. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also had a problem with that.--andreasegde (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Matovina book link

I just noticed that the "Matovina 2000" reference links are dead. Were these supposed to go to separate Google Books pages? I'm not sure how to affect the "sfn" source for these links. Thanks. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're supposed to be like that, I think. I copied them from The Beatles' page.--andreasegde (talk) 08:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was a bit of detective work, but they're fixed now.--andreasegde (talk) 12:02, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Good work. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 02:15, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Data creep?

If this article continues to bloat on the basis of Matovina's book, we may as well cut and paste the whole darn book in here. Pzzp (talk) 06:02, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only one book has been released on this subject. Personally, I find the book far more reliable than many of the magazine articles that have perpetuated myths about the band through the years. Better to be a condensed version of the book rather than strung-together magazine articles. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 02:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Mr. Orbie; there are 28 books listed in the 'References' section, which shows how many mention just one or two lines about Badfinger. What's wrong with citing a book, anyway? People have been quoting the Bible for years, no?--andreasegde (talk) 08:51, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, there are 55 pages referenced from Matovina's book, and 135 references in total. 88 against 55 isn't that bad.--andreasegde (talk) 10:40, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was born a Badfinger fan so don't think that I'm an unfair critic. For perspective, both Ghandi and Rolling Stones articles have 138 references. Apart from the disproportion I see, maybe it's just me, but I think encyclopedic attributes of concision and brevity are getting short shrift.Pzzp (talk) 23:49, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have a valid point, but encyclopedias have limitations because of paper, whereas this place does not. Maybe Ghandi and the Rolling Stones need more references? Nice that you're a fan, BTW.--andreasegde (talk) 16:54, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mike

Why doesn't Mike Gibbins have his own page? This would be pretty insulting seeing as how he was a member before Tom and Joey. He should have his own article even if it is just a stub saying what band he was part of and when he died. Terry Draper has one and nobody has heard of him and it's about one line long.--Canadian Reject (talk) 15:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Then why don't you start one? Get in there, and get your hands dirty. :) --andreasegde (talk) 22:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mike had a wiki article for a brief time a few years ago. The problem is that aside from his Badfinger work there was barely anything else to add, and the Badfinger article already covers all the relevant points of Mike's career. Even the articles on Pete Ham and Tom Evans feel padded to me because their stories are scant outside of Badfinger. -- ZincOrbie (talk) 19:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]