Talk:Mark Lester/Archive 1

Archive 1

harriet/lucy

hi would just like 2 say that Mark Lesters daughter is not called harriet or if is den he has another daugther called lucy, really random but i no her so there u go, lol —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.241.118 (talk) 00:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

i find it interesting that ip user 82.211.98.18 is monitoring this page and possible trying to cover up that Mark may just be the biological father of MJ's kids. 69.108.205.10 (talk) 11:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Interesting, perhaps, but actually I find it reassuring that an editor is trying to prevent unsourced and unsupported speculation regarding a BLP subject from creeping into an encyclopedia. Steveozone (talk) 03:55, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Paris Jackson

Due to WP:BLP issues, claims like this cannot be used in the article. There have been numerous stories about the parentage of Michael Jackson's children, and the sourcing on this is no more reliable than any of the others. Without a DNA test or court ruling, this will stay out of the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

This story is all over the web today. It comes back to this article in the News of the World, which is claiming it as a "world exclusive". Even if Mark Lester has given the NOTW this information in good faith, it falls far short of the requirement for inclusion in a Wikipedia article, due to the policy on biographies of living people. It should also be pointed out that this is among a number of claims that have been made about the parentage of the children of Michael Jackson and Debbie Rowe, and none of these claims has been verified.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:38, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Jackson was not the father of any of his three children. Mark Lester may well be the real father. This definitely needs including. (92.11.131.81 (talk) 13:11, 9 August 2009 (UTC))

There have been so many claims and counterclaims that nobody is sure of anything. If Mark Lester really wants to prove this, he would have to take a DNA test. Anecdotal evidence, however well meaning, does not amount to much.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 13:17, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether he turns out to be their biological father. He has made the claim publicly and it is that claim which should be reported in this article.

See:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8192030.stm

Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 13:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Claims that have not been proven should not be included if they invade the privacy or affect the human dignity of living people, especially children. The fact that he ran to a notorious tabloid instead of a more reputable body doesn't help either. — Please comment R² 14:02, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

His association with Jackson needs to be mentioned. (92.11.131.81 (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2009 (UTC))

This claim is no truer than it was at this time yesterday. What has happened is that there has been a lot of media coverage based on one person's anecdotal account. This is a classic WP:BLP violation, and cannot be used in the article without more substantial evidence.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 14:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The article does not claim that he is the father. It correctly states that he claims he is the father. That is a certain fact, and is now being covered worldwide. --Franklin Demenge (talk) 14:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Still don't see consensus for this, but in the spirit of 3RR I'm not removing it for the time being. — Please comment R² 15:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Nobody has denied that the claim has received a lot of media coverage. However, Michael Jackson has a long history of producing stories like this, and repeating them a hundred times does not make them any more true than they were in the first place. This is why the WP:BLP issue occurs, since it is disrespectful to Paris Jackson to repeat unverified material. It is clear that some people are not going to be happy until this is in the article, so for the time being I am not going to waste any more Wiki time by removing it. However, it is still a WP:BLP issue regardless of what some people are saying.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:31, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

The WP article does not claim he is the father. We do not yet know if that is true. The article WP article merely states that he claims that he is the father. That is certainly true. --Franklin Demenge (talk) 15:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Having four citations for this story is over the top and looks messy. The average reader will not click on all four of them. The BBC link was chosen because it is a traditional WP:RS, and because it makes clear that this is a claim rather than a fact.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:20, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the above comments by Franklin Demenge and others that the claim of parenthood is notable, verifiable and should be included. I think every sensible person would agree that Jackson wasn't the father of his step-children for obvious reasons (the children are clearly white), the only question that remains is who was the father when it wasn't Jackson. Mark Lester, until now known as the children's godfather, sheds important light on this issue with his recent statement. Hopefully, a DNA test will shed even more light, if it isn't obstructed by the Jackson family (which, by the way, aggressively has claimed biological parenthood the other way, as in the recent case of Omer Bhatti). Nashassum (talk) 03:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Jewish

Should the article mention that Mark is Jewish? He had to change his surname because audiences in Britain would not have accepted a child actor if they had known of his Jewishness. The same thing happened with his "Oliver!" co-star Ron Moody. (92.11.231.105 (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2009 (UTC))

As for any biography, that would require a reliable source. As I understand it, having a Jewish father would not necessarily make him Jewish, so we would need (preferably) a comment from Lester himself on that point. Rodhullandemu 16:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

"Jewish" can mean different things to different people. It could mean "a practicing member of the Jewish faith" (I don't know if this is true of Mark Lester). It could also mean "having some Jewish ancestry" (again, the source here does not go into details). Since there are WP:BLP issues, there needs to be better evidence, or the "British Jews" category is best dropped.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:36, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Singing voice in Oliver!

In December 2004, the Mail on Sunday reported that Lester was dubbed in Oliver! (film) (1968) by Kathe Green, the daughter of the film's musical director Johnny Green.[1] It has been widely repeated since then, but whether this is a reliable story is hard to say.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:13, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

She is credited as such on IMBD, for what that's worth, so I suppose it may be true. Rodhullandemu 17:24, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Some Wikipedians turn up their noses at IMDb, saying that it is a self-published free-for-all and not a reliable source. However, they are most likely citing the Mail on Sunday report from 2004.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:36, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

There was an ITV documentary called "After They Were Famous: Oliver!", originally shown on New Years Day 2005, which showed archive footage of Kathe Green recording Lester's vocals for the film. (92.12.21.37 (talk) 13:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC))== Drugs ==

Lester has said himself in many interviews that after he turned 18 in 1976 he abused hard drugs constantly for about 5 years until he had to have his nose rebuilt and went into rehab in the US. This is pretty important and ought to be in the article. (92.4.53.254 (talk) 12:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC))

The main issue here is sourcing. Lester may have done this, but as a rule tabloid sources (Sun, Mirror, Star etc) are not suitable as sources for controversial claims that are likely to be challenged. The tabloids have a bumpy track record with showbiz stories, and have backtracked or paid libel damages on numerous occasions. If Lester did have a nose job after abusing cocaine, it should have a more reliable source than a tabloid newspaper story.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Also the wording would need to put it in context, starting the sentence with the part about having his nose rebuilt is too dramatic. And "hard drugs including cocaine" - the source doesn't mention any other drugs. Cassandra 73 (talk) 13:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Lester told the ITV "After they were Famous" Oliver! reunion that he took every illegal drug he could get except heroin. The programme was broadcast on New Year's Day 2005 and he has talked about his hard drug use in many other interviews. (92.4.53.254 (talk) 17:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC))

After Googling around, I found this story from The Independent in August 1993. In it, Lester says: "I took drugs at parties and things. But no more than anybody else at that time. I had a puff on a joint once in a while, but that's about it, really. I had one or two harder drugs occasionally, but I never really liked them. I probably would have done exactly the same again. I can't say I regretted it - I don't. I never did." This is some way short of the dramatic claims in the Mirror story, which would need more solid sourcing. As a general rule, WP:BLP articles should steer clear of negative material about the subject unless it is both sourced and notable to the point where not to mention it would be a mistake. Lester's drug use as a youth is of borderline notability on the basis of the Independent source.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Then why did he need to go to rehab in the US, or have the emergency operation on his sinuses to save his nose? He has also admitted destroying his Ferrari when driving while high. The drug use should definitely be mentioned because it is what ended his acting career when he was 18. (92.4.53.254 (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2010 (UTC))

The requirement for inclusion in a Wikipedia article is verifiability, not truth. This is particularly important in articles that are biographies of living persons. I tried to find an autobiography by Lester in which he talked about this area, but it seems that he has not written one. Wikipedia articles have to stick to what is available for citation from reliable sources.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:32, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

I have just read an online interview where he claims to have spent over £20,000 on cocaine alone. (92.4.53.254 (talk) 18:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC))

Thanks. Could you post a link to this, or any other sources with similar material. As mentioned before, tabloids are not ideal.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:38, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

This Daily Mail article quotes him as saying he bought four grams of cocaine a day and also used dope and acid: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1206715/Is-ex-husband-Mark-Lester-father-Jackos-children-No-hes-completely-nuts.html

(92.4.53.254 (talk) 18:58, 1 August 2010 (UTC))

The Daily Mail is not ideal as a source for some of the lurid claims here, which would have WP:BLP issues if they were wrong. Sorry to be fussy here, but ideally the sourcing should be from a broadsheet newspaper or an established author.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:25, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

IP 92 is clearly the banned User:HarveyCarter and there are a couple of Admins that will block on sight simply for quacking. I will add a template to his user page. Off2riorob (talk) 19:42, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Age questions

Since this is one of HC's obsessive edits lets get this on the talk page for the record. The Oliver! (film) article states that the filming began 23 June 1967 and Mark did not turn 9 until 11 July. Unfortunately, the ref provided no longer works correctly (do any of you know how to find it in an online archive?) but I have no reason to doubt it at this time. Also the link that the IPs keep removing [2] also states that he was 8. Not knowing when filming wrapped it does seem that his birthday did occur during filming so we are splitting hairs here a bit, but, the sentence does read that he was "cast" at age 8. Since casting would have taken place weeks (at least) before filming began I feel that the article as it now stands is correct. If anyone can find info that supersedes this then I am open to changes but until that time I would say that we should keep this one bit of info as is. MarnetteD | Talk 17:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

The Mirror story here also gives eight years old in a quote from Lester. Since he would have been cast at the age of eight and been eight for at least part of the filming, there is nothing substantially wrong with the article on this point.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 22:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Since filming went on until January 1968 he was nine for nearly all of the time. The article is misleading because it suggests he was eight when he played Oliver. (92.0.50.50 (talk) 11:07, 6 August 2010 (UTC))

OK, we've looked at this, see the info above. Now for some honesty, are you Harvey Carter?--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Who's Harvey Carter? No my name is actually John Thorndyke, why? (92.0.50.50 (talk) 12:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC))

The article is currently semi-protected because of sockpuppetry by User:HarveyCarter. Anyway, the article says "In 1967, at the age of eight, Lester was cast in the title role in the film version of Lionel Bart's musical Oliver!". This is not an incorrect statement, although Lester's ninth birthday occurred during filming. As pointed out above, there is some hair-splitting here.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:42, 6 August 2010 (UTC)