Talk:Courtney Love/Cobain case

KC suicide dispute

Does anyone agree that this shouldn't be on here? It really relates to the Kurt Cobain page, it doesn't really have an impact on Courtney's bio. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chickpeaface (talk • contribs) 17:57, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it's thoroughly covered at Kurt Cobain#Suicide dispute. I've been talking with Cobaincase (talk · contribs) about this through email. We have come to an agreement that the prose about it is enough on the Cobain article, and unnecessary here. But he does want at least a link to the Suicide dispute section there which I added but it was reverted. I agree with Cobaincase that there should be some link of the evidence at least, because if there is enough verifiable sources and information to make a whole section about how Cobain's suicide is disputed and there is evidence to suggest Love was directly involved, there has to be some kind of connection here. This edit would be the bare minimum. -- Reaper X 05:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that it should say 'dispute' on it though, because unless seattle police rule it as a murder or implicate Courtney, it's slander, which is obviously not appropriate. How about something that says "See also:Kurt Cobain Suicide"Chickpeaface 18:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)]

Well that would be a completely different matter to be dealt with on Cobain's talk page. -- Reaper X 05:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[removed comment violating WP:BLP and WP:NPA] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobaincase (talk • contribs)

As you have already been told, the alleged controversy surrounding his death is covered at Kurt Cobain#Suicide dispute, in a neutral, factual manner. It is not appropriate to cover it here, as it is very slanderous to imply that Courtney Love was responsible. You obviously are either a fan of or perhaps the creator of this cobaincase.com site, as you have named your Wiki account after it. Your edits are attempting to present the conspiracy theory as fact, and that is 'not going to fly here. Also, Please stop making accusations about other users' agendas, as continuing with that behavior is going to land you in hot water as well. Tarc 13:46, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I have already discussed this with you personally as well, Cobaincase. I'd also advise you not to accuse any editors of scandalous behaviour (see WP:NPA). -- Reaper X 16:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

You'll find I don't have an email address available as I do not appreciate you cobaincase spamming my inbox with conspiracy theories that most people left in the 90's with the X Files. Why don't you put all this energy into a "crime" that actually happened? Unless seattle police rule it otherwise Kurt Cobain committed suicide, and putting so on Courtney Love's page to suggest otherwise is slander.Chickpeaface (talk) 11:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Have I spammed Reaper X’s inbox? I most certainly have not spammed yours, as you state, Chickpeaface.

I just want to have an intelligent debate.

[removed comment violating WP:BLP]

Then when I clarified the timeline by adding the date that Love read Cobain’s alleged suicide note, (alleged because there is much evidence that the last four lines were forged) and added the specific facts that Cobain died on April 8, Love played the recording of herself reading the note on April 10 (and that this was repeatedly played on MTV) and Love's debut album was released on April 12, this was also reverted.

Why?

I just clarified the dates and added the fact that it was played on MTV. The statement that the suicide note was alleged was also reverted, with bias, ignoring all the evidence of forgery.

All my changes were unbiased and related solely to Love and they were reverted by Chickpeaface who will not engage in a dialog with me and even goes so far as to accuse me of spamming her which is completely unfounded and insulting; "I do not appreciate you...spamming my inbox".

This is a site dedicated to the truth. Reaper X agreed that there "should be some link of the evidence at least, because if there is enough verifiable sources and information to make a whole section about how Cobain's suicide is disputed and there is evidence to suggest Love was directly involved, there has to be some kind of connection here."

Again, two highly respected, unbiased, investigative journalists wrote a book in 2004 which came to the conclusion that Cobain’s death was not suicide and that Love was directly involved, yet this information has being censored on Love’s page by Chickpeaface.

Is wikepedia about the truth, or is it a biased reflection of an unwillingness to look at facts.

If Cobain’s death was not at his own hand, and if Love was involved, he deserves to have the truth revealed.

Again all I did was remove the biased opinion that his death was not self inflicted, added a more complete timeline of Love’s pre-recorded reading, adding that it was broadcast repeatedly on MTV and that Love’s album debuted two days later.

All this was reverted by Chickpeaface in a biased attempt to keep people from learning the facts and making their own decision about Cobain’s death. I also added a link to his Suicide/dispute page and that was also reverted. --paultimmons (talk) 08:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Reliable sources state that the official findings was that it was a suicide. You unreliable sources are given their due in Kurt Cobain#Suicide dispute, along with sources to counter their allegations. Du to policies regarding biographies of living persons, this info cannot be added to this page, unless it is ever confirmed that Love had a hand in this. Period. I believe that that is about as clear as it can be explained to you. Tarc (talk) 13:49, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I have opened a case at the BLP noticeboard, so we can hopefully put an end to this. Tarc (talk) 13:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Tarc, I couln't have put it better myself. Chickpeaface (talk) 18:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Chickpeaface never directed me to the policies regarding biographies of living persons. I am a newbie and respect all Wikepedias policies. I respect the policies regarding biographies of living persons. I believe that a New York Times Bestseller about Courtney Love warrants a mention on her Wikepedia page.--paultimmons (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. The way the entire thing and the organizations that support it have become, instead of convincing people of the possiblity of murder, is anti-Courtney propoganda. The argument does not belong here and is a theory with heavy circumstantial evidence, which is not enough to convict someone and can be disputed in a court of law. Just because the book and theory is popular does not always mean it is a correct one. Theres many slanderous things said about Courtney after all and the media jumps on that, and frankly I do not believe Courtney can be as 'evil' as everyone potrays. They give her far too much credit in areas where they want to argue that shes something of a slut or make her look bad and do not give her credit where is due such as music and her band. I will say that at times she is somewhat of a media whore, but hey so is Spears, whose even worse in my opinion than Courtney has ever been. I think people need to leave her alone and let her be. She does play the widow and Kurt card every now and then, but theres so much more to Courtney than just Kurt or Nirvana. In fact she more of a household name than he is anyway.

Xuchilbara (talk) 21:50, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Well I said to Cobaincase that if there is going to be any mention of these allegations in this article, we would have to carefully craft it here so that we don't violate WP:BLP. If we were to do this, we must definitely include that these are allegations. Also, it should be short enough that it isn't a coatrack, and it relates directly to Love herself. Whether we should have it at all, I will remain neutral there. -- Reaper X 22:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah I agree. She, however, was on the verge of divorce w/ Kurt towards the end. (This is attested by Courtney more than once and I can obtain and provide sources if need be.) Maybe that should be mentioned, but w/ it Love also said she wished she had married Norton. It does concern the marriage portion at least.

Xuchilbara (talk) 00:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[removed comment violating WP:BLP]

In my last post I was very careful about following the rules for living people. The book was a national bestseller about Love by two highly respected investigative journalists from a major publication, Rolling Stone. There was a big controversy at the time and Love commented on the book in the press. In my last post (which was simply an addition to Love's page) I stated that it was controversial and that the SPD maintain that Cobain was a suicide. I feel that if the suicide controversy warrants a mention on Cobain’ page, it warrants a mention on Love’s in the form of mentioning a bestselling book about Love. I do not understand how that could be considered vandalism.

I could keep posting and change my ip address when one gets banned, it's not hard to do, but that's not my style. All this controversy on her discussion page tells people where to go if they want to search for the truth.

It seem like you are all big Courtney Love fans who maintain her wiki page and who just are unwilling to even entertain the theory that Love was involved at all.

[removed comment violating WP:BLP] --paultimmons (talk) 01:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I do hope you know that this is an encyclopedia, not a place for outlandish theories. Theres contradicting evidence to what you stated as well. Courtney was a drug addict you say? SO was alot of people hence all the OD in the Seattle scene among her peers, and even into more modern times like w/ Layne Staley's death. Let us not forget that Cobain was likewise a heavy user as Love was.

Hoke was sleazy and came from the streets, you, yourself cannot deny that his statements are questionable given his background. Frankly, i think you should stay off of Courtney's page and go to a real website to boast your POV of Kurt's death. If you have a disagreement, I would defenately say you can post it on my user page, rather than bickering on a talk page. You do not even take in consideration to what Frances would think of you talking bad about her mom like this, I think Kurt would be ashamed.

You also are not even remotely neutural, if this controversy is to be added in the article, it should be written from NPOV that reports facts about the allegations, rather than reposting "facts" of the theory. I hope you know you are not making the Cobain case fans look any better. Xuchilbara (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[removed comment violating WP:BLP] --paultimmons (talk) 06:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[removed comment violating WP:BLP] --paultimmons (talk) 05:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)