Jump to content

Talk:Michael Lohan

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

Category:American criminals

[edit]

I would delete this. The only thing of note are his relation to Lindsay, and a 2008 entry in imdb in what is probably a minor role. Not enough material to make a page out of.--Sleepy2222 (talk) 02:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is it just me, or does Lohan's inclusion in this category stretch the article's credibility? Were it not for his daughter's celebrity, here is a person who would be of no note whatsoever. I've met the man, and I assume he hopes to change that (preferably for the better) someday; for now, however, notability is (literally) relative... RadioKirk talk to me 20:07, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Man, I didn't mean to cause such a stir. I was trying to think of another category to put him under and "American Criminals" was the only one I could think of. 72.139.53.83 21:59, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not a stir so much as a laugh, and I realize you weren't intending to be funny, so, my apologies for that. If it helps, though, "I need to think of a category" could be considered a reason to not pick one until one is appropriate. :) RadioKirk talk to me 22:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think he is notable as is Dina Lohan because they are parents of four aspiring performers, two which are very notable. Michael and Dina Lohan are frequently discussed in the media, and many may look into more information on them.(Circusstar (talk)) 22:26, 1 May 2010

Notability

[edit]

As regards the now completed deletion discussion, in case of future such discussions: As a journalist, I have found that this article provides encyclopedic information that I actively use in news stories, after going to the linked, footnoted sources themselves for verification. It's particularly helpful for quickly verifying such delicate items as convictions and jail sentences. Without this article, it would take longer, often when I am on deadline, to find the appropriate sources that are available here in the footnotes. --Tenebrae (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birthplace

[edit]

Lohan's parents, Richard E. Lohan and Marilyn (Desiderio), were both American. I think this stuff about Michael Lohan being born in Galway (!), Ireland is some kind of error - perhaps an extrapolation of the family maybe having ancestors from Galway. Certainly he is usually described as having been raised in Long Island, New York. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 06:33, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at both sources now, and they're both The Sunday Mirror (Daily Mirror). I'm not even sure if British tabloids can be used as reliable sources at all, but this would seem definitely suspect, especially one that starts off by calling Lohan "the crazed Irish dad". All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:18, 4 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources report he was born in Ireland. Spelling Style (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
All tabloid sources. Tabloids are not definitive sources for information such as this. If The New York Times said Lohan was born in Ireland, I'd probably believe it. But these types of papers? No. All Hallow's Wraith (talk) 22:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Commodities Futures Fraud

[edit]

The article is not correct with regard to his early 1990s legal matters. See here: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/945/1214/289688/

It was not insider trading, it was fraud. He was ultimately sentenced to four years. This was his second commodities futures fraud case. That's why it was a criminal contempt case: in the first case he was ordered not to commit commodities futures fraud again, so when he did so he was in criminal contempt of that earlier court order. The article does not mention the first criminal matter.

In the second matter he served four years in prison in upstate NY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.62.64 (talk) 02:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kristi

[edit]

The section of the article does not make it clear whether or not he was the father. Could this be clarified? Spelling Style (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for pointing that out. Nightscream (talk) 23:01, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Had me going

[edit]

Does this guy really exist? This is just a put-on, isn't it? An elaborate put-on. Had me going, I'll admit. Rt3368 (talk) 09:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Career

[edit]

The article has a section entitled "Career", that says "At age twenty, Lohan became a Wall Street trader on the floor of the commodity exchange." That's all the section says. Is he still a trader on the commodity exchange? Has he worked in any other professions? —BarrelProof (talk) 16:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Birth dates

[edit]

Birth dates of the three public-figure children, who are all adults in this case, are valid to include. Indeed WP:DOB which a precious editor cited even says: "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object."

I would ask that editor not to edit-war but to respect WP:BRD and begin a discussion here or an RfC if he or she wishes. --Tenebrae (talk) 04:57, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tenebrae, every respect, but birth dates of anyone other than the article's subject (and I read the quote you reproduce above as specific to the article's subject) are irrelevant in that article and must be removed per the BLP sections I cited in my edit. Such dates would only be relevant if the article's subject himself is known for them, such as someone committing a crime against someone else. This is policy. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 22:09, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See also previous discussions here and (your own) here. I am in full agreement that the data is WP:TRIVIA and not a WP:DONTLIKE issue. The question to ask and answer is, in my mind, "is this information vital to the reader's understanding of the article subject?" If the answer is "no", then it's out per BLP. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 22:31, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
ATinySliver, I appreciate your discussing it — I see we're both experienced, longtime editors &mdash. I would have to point to a more recent discussion that unlike the previous two was an RfP, at Talk:Brian Austin Green#RfC: Names and DOB's of children in a BLP. The closing admin wrote:

The policy on biographies of living persons clearly leaves the inclusion of details of family members up to the discretion of the article's editors, as long as the information is well-sourced. All editors seem to agree that there are reliable sources, and the overwhelming majority of editors favor keeping full names and dates of birth of the children in the article.

I'm sure you've seen that despite this, I've left out birth information for Dakota Lohan, though including it would have been within WP:BLP as per the above closing, and certainly within the normal parameters of such biographical references as Who's Who. But as a way of trying to meet another editor halfway, I did not include it and only included the dates of the three notable children, notability defined as each having a Wikipedia article. So what do you say? Meet halfway? --Tenebrae (talk) 23:03, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After I wrote the above, I discovered that you edit-warred at the article. After being reverted, with the article going back to its extant state, we do not re-revert but, per WP:BRD, discuss the edit. Your interpretation of policy is not the only interpretation, and I pointed to a RfC that disagrees with your interpretation. Indeed, WP:DOB, as I quoted, is at odds with your interpretation. If you want to call for an RfC here, that's within your rights. But I expect that an experienced editor such as yourself will not continue to edit-war. --Tenebrae (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Tenebrae, please understand that I do not consider removal of data that I believe to be in violation of policy to be an edit war; that said, per BRD, I will not remove it again.
That said (), let's see if we can get something actually written in "stone". Please join in here. —ATinySliver/ATalkPage 🖖 23:20, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Michael Lohan. 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) 23:16, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Lohan&oldid=1201874481"