Jump to content

Talk:James McCartney

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

Notability

[edit]

Not notable? Paul McCartney's son? Are you kidding? He could be locked up in a mental hospital and never seen by the public and he'd still be worth writing about. Stevage 15:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and have removed the notability tag with the addition of why James McCartney is notable in the music industry--he co-wrote some songs with Paul McCartney, played lead guitar (with an electric guitar solo) and drums on two of his albums, and also played lead guitar on Linda McCartney's only album. That should do it. Layla12275 21:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's my impression that in Wikipedia being related to a famous person does not in itself confer notability. Having played on a few of his father's lesser-known recordings and on his mother's (extremely obscure, it would seem) record should, however, make James McCartney notable, but only marginally so. Thus this article is disproportionately long and involved. (It also includes, as of this writing, a fair amount of trivia that should be excised in any case.) TheScotch (talk) 07:57, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heather McCartney

[edit]

I disagree with the line that states something like, because Paul adopted Linda's daughter Heather, she can be considered James' 'full sister'. I don't know the rationale for stating this, but it seems to me pretty obvious that even though her stepfather adopted her, it doesn't change the reality of her paternity, and calling her anything other than the siblings' half-sister is odd. Anchoress 07:03, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So...if Paul and Linda adopted a daughter together, she wouldn't be Mary's, Stella's and James's full sister? Adoption of a child by an adult makes that adult a parent in the full sense of the word, and though Heather is James's biological half-sister, she is his adoptive full sister.74.39.18.117 20:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What we're discussing is the difference between a full and a half sibling. Heather is James' half sibling because they share only one parent in common. Her legal status v/v her stepfather doesn't change that. To take your example in the other direction, if Paul and Linda had divorced, and Paul had repudiated his adoption of Heather, would she then not be James' sister at all? No. She would still be his half sister, as she had been even after Paul had adopted her, and she would be despite any change in her legal status v/v Paul. Anchoress 00:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"Heather is James' half sibling because they share only one parent in common. Her legal status v/v her stepfather doesn't change that."
Paul McCartney is not Heather McCartney's stepfather. He is her father. Any legal document would list McCartney, not the late John See, as her father. Any claim that Paul is less of a parent to Heather than Linda was (and I highly doubt, had he divorced her mother, he would have rejected his daughter any more than any biological father would) simply because he does not share her DNA is uninformative because any official document would disagree with you. As is any claim that she is less of a sister to James than Mary and Stella are. These claims are also, might I add, highly offensive to anyone who has adopted children or was an adopted child. I completely understand that this is not your intention, so please be careful. 74.39.17.49 22:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry that you think my words are offensive. I simply disagree with you. I still hold to my original assertion. Heather is not James' full sister, despite Paul's adoption and their family closeness. To say so in an encyclopedia is misleading. Anchoress 22:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I came here from WP:3O. If she was a half-sister before adoption, she is a half-sister afterward. Adoption did not change who her biological parents are, regardless of the legal and familial implications. The word "half-sister" is used to refer to biological relation. This is not offensive, it's merely the meaning of the word. The OED documents this as the use of the word for a little over 800 years. Hope this helps. —ptk✰fgs 02:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. I am editing the article accordingly. Anchoress 02:52, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of Citation

[edit]

There is only one citation in the entire article- none of the statements in 'Family and Personal Life' have citations, which they should because they don't make the most sense. They are also out of order. I'd put the little 'citation needed' thing next to practically every statement in 'Family and personal life', but I've no idea how.68.183.182.214 (talk) 05:49, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added an {{unreferenced}} tag for you. Anchoress (talk) 06:59, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Main reason for notability

[edit]

He is notable primarily for being the musical son of musician Paul. the lede should reflect this. the info on his siblings should be at the bottom of the article, in personal life. his relationship with his father, musical releases, performances (both solo and with father), and other musical info should dominate the lede. If he wasnt a musician, he of course would still be notable, but then the article could start with his family relations. Ive attempted to fix this.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

James McCartney is not notable at all "for being the musical [or otherwise] son of" Paul McCartney, and this relation, though it may appear in the first paragraph, should not appear in the first sentence. TheScotch (talk) 08:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

'Digital only'

[edit]

The text says: 'It is his first physical release, the two individual EPs being digital only.' CDs are digital. Maybe 'download only' would be better. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.108.145.40 (talk) 15:34, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notes on big update, photo

[edit]

So while working on an update of the page, I went ahead and contacted the website people to release a photo in the infobox into the Creative Commons. Anyways, they said we could use this publicity photo - I like that it's more current than the other one, but if someone has a recent performance shot, that would probably be more preferable. Feels weird using publicity shots on Wikipedia. Otherwise, the update I did was pretty standard, just organizing the content into an 'early life', 'career' structure as is more normal, and adding some recent references. MusicLover650 (talk) 01:38, 22 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Beatles RfC

[edit]

You are invited to participate in an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/The Beatles on the issue of capitalising the definite article when mentioning that band's name in running prose. This long-standing dispute is the subject of an open mediation case and we are requesting your help with determining the current community consensus. Thank you for your time. For the mediators. ~ GabeMc (talk|contribs) 21:59, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on James McCartney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on James McCartney. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:James_McCartney&oldid=1205569260"