Jump to content

Talk:Adam Lambert

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 112.211.164.198 (talk) at 08:06, 21 June 2012 (→‎Re: photos: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Bar fight

I'm a little disturbed to see a fight outside a Helsinki bar receive mention in a Wikipedia biography. I never see such irrelevant details mentioned in other celebrity bios, and wonder why this incident should receive attention here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilover2901 (talkcontribs) 04:51, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An individual's arrest is not an irrelevant detail and is information that is found in many celebrity biographies. Aspects (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An individual's arrest is not an irrelevant detail when the arrest is for something serious - not a spat outside a bar, when no charges are laid, and the two involved are basically taken in to cool off and sober up. I would suggest that the only reason this is here is that Adam Lambert is gay and the spat took place between him and his boyfriend. If Adam were heterosexual, do you honestly think this would be here??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikilover2901 (talkcontribs) 15:10, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If Lambert were heterosexual, the information would still be here if the arrest was reported by reliable sources. Aspects (talk) 14:34, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I get what all of you guys are saying, but lets remember that this is an encyclopedia site and should contain information that is of some kind of relevance; should we really have some data on the page in regards to an incident that had no greater outcome than that of an arrest (bearing in mind it was dropped without further investigations??) As for the sexuality thing, in this day an age such things should be irrelevent.BrotherDarksoul (talk) 20:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Aspects, I appreciate your perspective and the point that the incident was reported by reliable sources. It's just that so many things are "reported", especially for an openly-gay celebrity, and I don't think this is one is relevant in the least. In fact, when it's the only statement that describes the relationship, it serves to define it, and that's grossly unfair and, in my opinion, inaccurate. I agree with BrotherDarksoul.Wikilover2901 (talk) 22:14, 12 February 2012 (UTC)Wikilover2901[reply]

Generally we exclude trivial information if such information weren't backed up by reliable sources. Lambert's sexuality is irrelevant in this case; if he were straight, and this were backed up by reliable sources this information still being in the article, see other bios like Hugh Grant or Billie Joe Armstrong about their arrests, just to mention a few of them. Tbhotch. Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:35, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i also understand the point being made, but must agree with Wikilover2901 and BrotherDarkSoul. in hindsight, this was an extremely minor event, reported (and exaggerated) at first by tabloids in Finland, picked up by THR -- which was then quoted in every other article about the incident in the first 12-24 hour news cycle. it's not clear that they were actually, technically arrested as opposed to held for questioning until the situation could be assessed. i also find it to be a distortion of lambert's personal life (and at the moment certainly) his ongoing relationship to see this alone, as it's defining qualification. should more minor detail about the couple be added just to balance this out?; or might it not be better to reconsider whether calling this an arrest, as opposed to (at worst) saying that attention was brought to the relationship by the media after a late-night scuffle outside a bar in Finland (for example)? again, i think this entry ought to be revisited/ultimately dropped perhaps -- even though i myself have altered the language at least twice to satisfy various points of view. (i did not post it to the page originally!) Jordan200 (talk) 06:37, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can see both sides, I would like to see this discussed further as I tend to agree with Jordan200 on the need to somehow keep this in perspective or to even delete at some point now that the facts are all in. I have to say I find the examples given by Tbhotch not to be at all similar to Lambert's other than the word "arrest" is used. Yes, Lambert had too much to drink and scuffled with his partner in public and was taken in to sort things out, perhaps even an official arrest. But it turned out to be nothing and both Lambert and Koskinen were released a few hours later with no charges filed and no fine. In the "arrest" of Hugh Grant, on the other hand, he admitted to breaking the law, pleaded no contest to lewd conduct, was fined and was put on two years probation and ordered to complete an AIDS education program. Big difference in my mind than to just being questioned. And Billie Armstrong's arrest was for DUI putting other drivers at risk - a serious offense - and he failed the breathalyzer test at over twice the legal limit . As far as "arrests" having been included in other wiki articles, there is mention in the wiki guidelines that something being done in one article is not an acceptable reason for its being done in another. I will try and locate this if it is not familiar to other users. (Omgoodnessme (talk) 00:53, 15 February 2012 (UTC))[reply]

I would like to request that the reference to the bar fight be removed. As the only descriptor, it distorts the relationship. A reader coming to the Adam Lambert page sees only a bar fight, which makes it sound like a violent relationship. Very biased. That's no more relevant on its own than describing their juicing regimen or Bora Bora trip! A neutral point of view requires that we state the relationship - period. If there's more relevant information to add at a later time, the section can be expanded at that time. Fugitivepieces (talk) 01:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)Fugitivepieces[reply]

I agree with Fugitivepieces that this should be removed for all the reasons discussed above. A "reliable source" reporting something does not mean it should be on wikipedia, and this seems to be the only valid reason given as to why it was put here in the first place. I believe all the reasons it should or should not be here have been discussed and now that all the facts are in regarding this situation, the consensus is that it should be removed. I, therefore, join Fugitivepieces and request the removal of this entry. (68.225.205.146 (talk) 00:39, 18 April 2012 (UTC)) Sorry...apparently I did not do a final updated check today as another user has already deleted this. Thanks. (68.225.205.146 (talk) 01:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Edit request on 13 February 2012

Please add the paragraph below at the end of the section on LGBT advocacy. This update is warranted because it is a subject that has taken on greater importance for Adam Lambert in the last 6 months and he is regularly asked about it in interviews. His response in the Pressparty interview seems particularly significant, relevant to his own difficulty in being accepted in mainstream music, and also quote-worthy (particularly the last line).

In January 2012, in an exclusive interview with UK music news magazine Pressparty, Lambert recognised that despite the social progress made in the United States, there was still a long way to go, particularly in the music industry. “I still long for the LGBT community's diversity to be more broadly represented in the entertainment industry. I think larger strides have been made in film and TV but we still are just at the beginning with mainstream music. I consider myself a post-gay man working in a pre-gay industry.” http://www.pressparty.com/pg/newsdesk/adamlambert/view/37904/ 80.254.146.36 (talk) 12:05, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --andy4789 · (talk? contribs?) 23:53, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification of festival cancellation

The entry saying "The festival was cancelled..." under Trespassing section is a little vague and has caused confusion for some readers new to wiki who don't check citations/references for clarification (and they shouldn't have to). Please stipulate if this refers to the festival at Knebworth Park only, the entire Sonisphere Festival (meaning all locations) or Moscow since that is in the prior sentence and could also be a festival. Thanks. (68.225.205.146 (talk) 02:54, 4 April 2012 (UTC))[reply]

 Done Jordan200 (talk) 4 April 2012

Edit request on 22 April 2012

In the American Idol (2009) section, in the sentence "For the first and only time, he ended up in the bottom two after the public vote, but was saved by the judges." please delete "but was saved by the judges." This is incorrect, the judge's save during Season 8 had already been used at Top 7 on Matt Giraud. The judges had no input into the process during Top 5 week, his safety was determined solely by public vote.

Instead the sentence should read, "For the first and only time, he ended up in the bottom two after the public vote but received enough votes to remain in the competition." Or something like that. Thanks!

24.7.55.93 (talk) 19:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done --Omgoodnessme (talk) 01:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Requests

Much of this article reads like a promo. The "Artistry" section is particularly problematic, what with its description of Lambert's "amazing" voice, outside of quotes. Some edits to tone and language would probably be warranted.

Artistry section has been problematic for users, that's apparent from the history, despite all that's been written about lambert's voice. too many quotes won't fly, web sites that do note for note comparisons or estimations haven't been accepted. this section in particular, i agree, is a work in progress. "amazing," by the way, should be in quotes based on the reference here -- and i will go do that. Jordan200 (talk) 06:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, on an unrelated note, there are lots of apostrophes where they shouldn't be, such as in "AMA's," "70's" and "90's." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.246.28.186 (talk) 20:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC) Done Jordan200 (talk) 06:21, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Re: photos

The main photo off to the side of the article is so outdated, there are just too many images out there available to choose from that shows his new look, his new style and shows his whole face, not hidden behind humongous shades that were so last year. The fans, like this one, would appreciate a better image for the Glam. Thanks.