Jump to content

Talk:Larry Norman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Street Level Records)
Former good article nomineeLarry Norman was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 13, 2008Good article nomineeNot listed

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Larry Norman. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 11:36, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fallen Angel Documentary section

[edit]

Could we please agree a more balanced wording for this section? In particular, the sentence "Norman's Solid Rock Records was said to have ended when, "Things finally fell apart in 1979, after it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife." Said by whom? This sentence is referenced from an article which was written off the back of viewing the movie. The problem is that the movie does not actually say that Larry was cheating on Pamela or that he was having an affair with anyone, never mind Randy's wife. At best / worst, the movie implies this, and the article author has embellished what was actually said. AtholMcG (talk) 21:10, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to propose this more balanced wording? Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:48, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would suggest removing the last sentence "Norman's Solid Rock Records was said to have ended when, "Things finally fell apart in 1979, after it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife."". This is just a statement made by someone who watched the movie, despite the movie not actually saying these things. As such I'd suggest including here (or anywhere) is merely spreading rumours, given there is no evidence available to support the claim. Further, the sentence has nothing to do with the section subject (the Fallen Angel movie) directly, since the movie doesn't say this. The remainder of the section I feel is acceptable. AtholMcG (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your claim is that "this is just a statement made by someone who watched the movie", is somewhat in error. There are at least three different versions of the documentary. In at least one, the first screening I saw, the claim is made. I suspect the author saw that version, or possibly an earlier edit. The one that was shown on-tour, and I believe the one that made it to the mass-produced DVD, does not make the claim, but simply alludes to it. I suspect that this is the one you saw. So unless you find that the statement is not supported by that author's claims, or, if it's a direct quote, you can get the author to retract that statement, removing the statement is not reasonable. That's why I asked for "more balanced wording" rather than what would you like to remove to satisfy your point of view on the subject. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies Walter, but I really cannot follow your logic here. In July 2009, John Cody published an article referencing a movie that was commercially released earlier that year (March 1st according to IMDB). His article included an image of the commercially released version’s artwork, and a “purchase here” link to the official website. Now, I have seen both the ‘mass produced’ and the pre-release ‘festival’ versions, neither of which included claim of an affair. There was another ‘additional footage’ version which I haven’t seen, but that only appeared in 2011. There was of course also an interview where David himself responded that the movie doesn't say that when challenged on this very point.
If I’m understanding correctly, you are referring to an early undistributed version which according to your memory does include this claim. And you ‘suspect’ that John saw this same or an even earlier edit. And held off on publishing an article until well after the commercial version minus claim was released. You may be correct of course. But correct or not your line of thought is just a theory. This argument would also require the claim to have been made by one of the interviewees in the movie, and not just by the narrator. I would venture that my belief John saw the commercial version then wrote his article is more likely. But I could be wrong, of course.
Anyway, the only verifiable versions of the movie that we can collectively refer to are those that were openly sold - before this article those were the aforementioned festival and commercial versions, both of which I have seen, and neither of which include such a claim. If you can identify and reference an alternate pre-release version which does have the claim, then I’d be happy to know where I can get a hold of or view it.
Regardless, on Wikipedia we cannot make assumptions about the version John saw. All we know (it seems) is that none of the reference-able versions include this claim, and John has made the claim. Thus I would suggest that for the sentence to be valid due to it being a direct quote from John’s article, we would also need a reference to the source he is quoting. We do not have such a reference ergo the sentence is not valid. Without that reference it is 50/50 whether John was quoting what was actually said in a version he saw, or was adding his own embellishment… Do we really author Wikipedia articles based on 50/50 scenarios like this? Incidentally, his article seems to be embellished from as early as the fourth paragraph - as “told by dozens who were there”. The film website lists twenty participants, which doesn’t seem like dozens to me.
That all said, I imagine neither of us will accept the others argument, and unless others chime in we will not reach consensus to remove the sentence. So let’s try to reach agreement on rewording it. I have two suggestions:
1. After viewing the movie, one journalist concluded that Norman's Solid Rock Records ended when, "it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife.”. Note however that the commercially available versions of the movie do not actually include such a claim.
Or 2. At the time Norman's Solid Rock Records ended, at least one employee suspected that Larry was “having an affair with Randy’s wife”. AtholMcG (talk) 19:21, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You followed my logic just fine. The cover did not change between the two versions. The documentary tour of the current release was in early 2011 (I attended the screening listed here. I saw the other version in the summer of 2009, which seems to coincide with the review John Cody wrote. There was also at least one earlier version, but I'm not referencing that one.
I fully agree that we cannot make assumptions about the version Mr. Cody saw. We can not assume that he did not make that claim based on the version we saw, which is what you're doing. All we can do is reference what Cody wrote. We will not call it a movie, we will call it a documentary. We would not write "Randy", but rather "Stonehill". Ans since we can't assume that Cody is assuming or concluding anything. We can quote, as you're suggesting, but not imply anything, unless we have a source to the contrary. What we have is https://canadianchristianity.com/bc/bccn/0709/20angel.html . See WP:NPOV for further details. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:36, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am not assuming anything about the version John Cody saw. What I am saying is that minus evidence that he saw a version which included the claim we have to accept that there is a 50/50 chance he reached that conclusion on his own. If that is the case then it is just his own belief, assumption or conclusion and not even supported by the movie he saw. In that case how could it be acceptable to include his thoughts in a section about a movie that doesn't actually support those thoughts? (Where is the released, available and verifiable version that does support them?). I could publish an article saying the exact opposite, but we wouldn't quote and reference it here would we? "Was said to have ended".... Said by whom? The only person we have a verifiable reference to who said this is John Cody. And he said this in his own article which contains no reference to any source he might have been quoting or paraphrasing. Conversely, he may have been referring something he did actually see and hear. We have no evidence to this effect though so at best (verifiably) the statement is John Cody's claim and his alone. As such I don't believe it warrants inclusion here at all, but certainly not under the current wording. If it must stay then I suggest that it must be clearly identified as John Cody's statement, and not something that the (released, available and verifiable) movie claims - thus my suggestion 1) earlier. It can be reworded to quote his name and 'documentary' if need be. I don't know how we change 'Randy' to 'Stonehill' given that it's a direct quote from John's article - unless we reword further to remove the quote altogether.
The preceding sentence details the conclusion of Mike Rimmer, and we make a point of making clear that it is his thought / comment. The sentence in question details something said by John Cody, but doesn't make clear that it is his thought / comment. That's essentially all I'm saying. We have a section about "Fallen Angel" that very much makes it seem as though Fallen Angel says there was an affair. But there is no released, available and verifiable version that does say that. Anyway, are you agreeable to changing it to "After viewing the documentary, journalist John Cody concluded that Norman's Solid Rock Records ended when, "it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife.”. Note however that the commercially available releases of Fallen Angel do not actually include such a claim."? AtholMcG (talk) 22:59, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The evidence is the reliable source, so you're questioning the source. Feel free to do so, with another reliable source. Alternately, take the source to WP:RSN to have it excluded. The source from Rimmer doesn't make any points about how SR ended so I'm not sure how it's a counter-point to Cody's statement. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Walter, but now I am really lost. I am not questioning the source of the sentence, which is clearly John's article. I am questioning the lack of a source to indicate that his sentence has any basis in truth. What evidence? Where is the proof of an affair? Did an affair take place or not? John Cody does not know. We do not know. John Cody's article isn't evidence or proof of an affair. It's just evidence of his writing an article and saying so. Mike Rimmer is a journalist who said something about Larry, and his words are clearly attributed to him. John Cody is a journalist who said something about Larry, but his words are not clearly attributed to him. The specifics of what they are talking about is irrelevant in comparing this aspect. John's words are packaged in a way that makes them appear to be fact (ie there WAS an affair - which would need proof) and also in a way that makes it seem like the movie actually says that - which it does not. I'm not even asking for the claim to be removed (though I do think it should be). I'm only asking for a rewording to make it clear that it is John Cody's claim and nothing more. IE to make the article more accurate. Do you really have an issue with such an amendment? AtholMcG (talk) 05:40, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If you're questioning "the lack of a source to indicate that his sentence has any basis in truth", then your issue isn't with Wikipedia but with Mr. Cody or the publisher of that work. It is clear that the words are Cody's. The sentence is clearly quoted and it's followed by the reference. We're not going to bludgeon readers with the obvious. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that "my" issue is more with John Cody than with Wikipedia in terms of valid content, but that is rather besides the point. You feel the sentence and context is clear. I do not. So instead of having one happy and one unhappy editor, neither of whom has any more authority in this than the other, why don't we work together to reword in a way that results in two reasonably happy editors? So again I propose "After viewing the documentary, journalist John Cody concluded that Norman's Solid Rock Records ended when, "it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife.”. Note however that the commercially available releases of Fallen Angel do not actually include such a claim.". This to me is clearer and more accurate, whilst retaining the quote itself. I fail to see how this subtracts anything from the page, and in my opinion it improves it, without "bludgeoning". Do you agree to such rewording or not? And if not what would be your proposed rewording? AtholMcG (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Leaves too many questions as there were two commercially available versions and clearly Cody viewed the first. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:13, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of us know which version John saw. Anyway, the only possible question I can see arising might be 'which version did John Cody view?'..... So how about "After viewing the documentary, journalist John Cody concluded that Norman's Solid Rock Records ended when, "it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife.”. Note however that the commercial release of Fallen Angel did not actually include such a claim."? We can add "2009" before "commercial" if we must. AtholMcG (talk) 19:20, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since this was the a review in 2009, we do know that he did not review the 2011 version. No change is needed. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:54, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
So we are agreed on changing the sentence in question to "After viewing the documentary, journalist John Cody concluded that Norman's Solid Rock Records ended when, "it was discovered Larry was cheating on his wife – and having an affair with Randy’s wife.”. Note however that the commercial release of Fallen Angel did not actually include such a claim."? AtholMcG (talk) 22:07, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, no change is needed to the article's current wording. It is clear that the word's are from Mr. Cody. Any dispute is with the author, not Wikipedia. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You think it's clear. I do not. Both of our views are surely equally valid. So again I suggest changing as above. It makes it clear in my view and you have not expressed that it reduces clarity in your view. You don't believe it needs changed, that's fair enough. But that doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be changed. What element of my proposal makes it less clear for you? AtholMcG (talk) 23:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Since our views are diametrically opposed they cannot both be valid. I reject your proposition that a change is needed so there is no WP:CONSENSUS for a change. Feel free to open this to a larger community. Options open are listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If another opinion can be expressed, I support Walter Görlitz on this matter. I understand the angst of those who were positively influenced by Larry Norman, but truth needs to win out. The documentary is not even close to the first time that someone claimed that Norman had an affair with Sarah Stonehill. It's uncomfortable for those of us who loved his music, but it needs to be said. Bob Caldwell CSL (talk) 01:17, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Views and personal opinions are subjective, therefore of course opposite views can both be valid, especially in matters of interpretation such as this. I have asked others (elsewhere) how the existing sentence reads to them and so far all responses have interpreted pretty much as I do. However, there is no angst on my part, and whether or not I was positively influenced by Larry is neither here nor there. I agree that the truth needs to win out. Yes, some have suggested or claimed that there was an affair. Doesn't mean there was one. And John Cody's 2009 article is the only referable source for such a claim that seems to be available. The movie DOES NOT make such a claim. In any case, I'm not asking for the claim to be removed, only for the wording to more clearly identify it as John Cody's conclusion / belief / opinion / statement. Early on in the discussion I conceded that the claim could stay. Where in my proposed rewrite does this alleged truth lose out? Anyway, I respect overall consensus of course, and at the moment I am in the minority so will refrain from proposing a rewrite until such time as there may be a change in consensus or further source material is found. AtholMcG (talk) 08:56, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, the referred article does not say that "Solid Rock Records" "ended"... It says "Things finally fell apart". What "things"? The company as it was at that time went through a fundamental change yes, but it is abundantly evident that it did not end - there were many Solid Rock releases after this event and it is still operating today! Truth needs to win out indeed. AtholMcG (talk) 09:18, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have found the following which I propose be referenced to add a counter claim alongside the existing John Cody reference. http://www.altarandthrone.com/throwback-thursday-9-the-outlaw-larry-norman/ and http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/articles/music/Charles_Norman__Talking_about_Larry_Norman_and_the_Fallen_Angel_documentary_/48678/p2/ AtholMcG (talk) 20:36, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
altarandthrone.com = blog = not a reliable source.
crossrhythms.co.uk of "Larry wasn't having an affair with Sarah" is Charles' own account and so not a reliable source, but that could be used as a source to state, "a claim Norman's brother refutes". Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Edit made per suggestion. I'm struggling to understand why Charles' words do not meet with reliable source guidelines though. Could you clarify? AtholMcG (talk) 20:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't old enough to know so his only knowledge of the situation is from his brother. Also, at the time of the interview, he was still trying to sell Larry's music. If there aspersions on Larry's credibility, that may hurt sales. He has everything to gain by downplaying any potential affair. Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Charles was 14-15 years old; plenty old enough to understand what an affair is. He did live in a different city though. Anyway, I'm not seeing any grounds for us to conclude that his only knowledge comes from Larry - Charles is friends with at least one of the guys in Daniel Amos, knows Bobby Emmons, toured with Jon Linn and Sarah in the early to mid 1980s... He may well have discussed the matter with any of these people, and numerous others. Also, in the Cross Rhythms interview he cites things said by DDS and Randy Stonehill, not anything said by Larry. AtholMcG (talk) 14:35, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. I shouldn't have stated anything about his age. He was not present in the relationship at that point and would have only had second-hand information from his brother. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thornbury book response removed

[edit]

Can you explain why you saw fit to remove the following suggested edit. Gregor Alan Thornbury has spent a few years researching and writing his new biography of Larry Norman and has had access to plenty of good source material concerning Solid Rock Records and its contacts with ABC / Word and correspondence between executives at Word and Norman, letters from lawyers during disputes and the final terminations of artists contracts, but hey stuff all that Walter still wants to insist he knows why the meeting on 17th June 1980 was called even though he hasn't seen the minutes of the meeting or listened to the recording of it when Thornbury has...

Gregor Alan Thornbury's, account of the issue

"While David Di Sabatino has claimed in his Fallen Angel documentary that Solid Rock Records fell apart in 1979 after it was discovered that Larry Norman was cheating on his wife Pam, and having an affair with Randy Stonehill's wife Sarah these claims have been cast into doubt by the new biography by Gregory Alan Thornbury, "Why Should The Devil Have All The Good Music: Larry Norman And The Perils Of Christian Rock" published on 20th March 2018 by Random House. Based on correspondence between executives at Word Records and Larry Norman, Thornbury claims, "not all was well in the relationship between Larry Norman and the parent company. The slow flow of product, Larry's mercurial correspondence, and his charges regarding Word's inadequate promotion of Solid Rock contributed to increasingly choppy waters in that relationship... Word was planning on dropping Larry's label" (Thornbury: 2018: p.187). Thornbury also suggests the break up of Solid Rock Records was due to friendships breaking down and arguments about money and contracts. When Solid Rock was established Larry had promised to deliver 4 albums per year, even before he had his roster in place: Larry "proposed to deliver to ABC / Word four records per year" (Thornbury: 2018: p.122), despite the fact he "really had no idea who this 'stable' of artists would be yet" (Thornbury: 2018: p.124). After the first two Solid Rock releases had sold well and been critically acclaimed, 1977's albums by Tom Howard and Pantano Salsbury had not repeated that success and in 1978 Larry produced albums for Dave Mattson and Salvation Air Force. "When [Larry] concluded that the results were not up to Solid Rock standards, he gave them to Myrrh, another label operated by Word, for distribution" (Thornbury: 2018: p.169). Thus from 1976-78 instead of delivering 12 Solid Rock albums to ABC / Word Norman had only produced four albums released on the label, two hits and two misses. The situation seemed to be improving again in 1979 with the release of Mark Heard's "Appalachian Melody" and news that Daniel Amos had signed with the label and finished mixing their third album "Horrendous Disc" by August 1979 (Thornbury: 2018: pp.184-5).

Once Norman received news that Word were planning to drop Solid Rock as a label things came to a head between Philip Mangano and Larry. "Once close friends, the relationship between Phil Mangano and Larry Norman began to disintegrate" (Thornbury: 2018: p.187)."Larry fired Phil Mangano as his personal manager" (Thornbury: 2018: p.190). Shortly afterwards, "Phil called for an agency-wide arbitration meeting. After a preliminary get-together, the date was set for June 17 [1980]. The purpose of the meeting was to clear up the relationship between Solid Rock and Street Level Artists Agency, and to deal with Daniel Amos' request to have all their contracts back from Solid Rock - management, tapes, publishing, and so on" (Thornbury: 2018: p.190). "Minutes for the meeting, taken by Sarah Stonehill, indicate those present included Phil Mangano, Larry Norman, the members of Daniel Amos (with the exception of percussionist Alex MacDougall), Randy Stonehill, Tom Howard, Bobby Emmons and Ray Ware (Randy's best friend and Street Level executive), along with a handful of lower-level Street Level employees". Over the next four pages of this chapter Thornbury summarises what was a 2 hour long meeting which was recorded on tape recorder in addition to being minuted by Sarah Stonehill and quotes statements made by Philip Mangano, Larry Norman, and summarises input from members of Daniel Amos and contributions from Randy and Sarah Stonehill. In Thornbury's account no mention is made of Di Sabbatino's claims that the meeting was called as "an intervention" where Philip Mangano and the long suffering Solid Rock artists confront Larry Norman about his behaviour in general and an allegation he is having an affair with Sarah Stonehill which will lead to the Normans and Stonehills marriages both ending in divorce within a few months of the meeting. "The nearly two-hour conversation is painful to listen to; Mangano and Larry's voices are both exasperated and angry. Mangano, chairing the meeting, opened by expressing his hope that once both business matters and personal grievances had been aired, God might bring some sort of 'reconciliation' to the situation" (Thornbury: 2018: p.191).

"He [Mangano] then announced that Solid Rock management was dissolved. This led to the next question: the recording contracts that Solid Rock issued to the artists in conjunction with Word. Some movement had already had already taken place along these lines: Tom Howard had been released from all aspects of his contract, principally because Word had no interest in releasing another record with him. Daniel Amos on the other hand, was a rising star" (Thornbury: 2018: p.191). Ten months after Horrendous Disc was completed and mixed the album had still not been released and the delay was having a serious financial impact on the band who wished to be released from all aspects of their contract and to try and get the album released elsewhere as well as other new songs written after they signed with Solid Rock. Larry's initial response was to agree to release them from the aspects of the contract which concerned him as their manager and he agreed they were artistically self-sufficient and didn't need production input from him in the studio and he was open to them signing a secular deal. The sticking point between the two sides was financial and contractual. "Word had paid to extract them from their Maranatha! contract and fronted money along with Solid Rock to have them complete Horrendous Disc" and had also paid for new songs to be demoed and for a new van for the band to use as they toured North America during their time with Solid Rock. The difference between the two parties at this stage was that while Larry was open to Daniel Amos being allowed to sign with another label he felt they should repay Word and Solid Rock for the money they had invested in them and honour their contract to let Solid Rock and Word release and distribute Horrendous Disc. On two occasions during the meeting Randy Stonehill spoke up defending Larry Norman's right to expect some kind of compensation if Daniel Amos were released from their contracts: "Randy piped up, uncharacteristically, and underscored that there was indeed an ethical obligation to Word, even if there was some way legally to skirt the issue" (Thornbury: 2018: pp 192-3). "Randy, again, spoke up in defence of Larry, saying that when he signed his contract he never imagined that absolutely anything he wanted he could have back 'just [be]cause,' but that there would be negotiation and compromise" (Thornbury: 2018: p. 194).

A further dispute then arose as to whether had lost faith in Solid Rock as a label due to their relationship with Larry or Phil Mangano, "Larry Norman snapped, even as he continued to defend himself. His voice broke in anger and despair as his soon-to-be-former friends looked on. The dream was over. He was broken. In some ways, he would never recover from the events of June 17, 1980" (Thornbury: 2018: p. 194).

"After the meeting was concluded, it was official. The relationship between Solid Rock and Street Level was over. So was Larry's friendship with Philip. What wasn't over, however, was the animosity" (Thornbury: 2018: pp. 194-5). It would take another 10 months before the wrangles over Horrendous Disc finally saw it released on 1st April 1981. Other relationships came to a close in the intervening period, Larry's "divorce with Pam was finalised on September 2, 1980" (Thornbury: 2018: p.197). "It wasn't the only marriage to dissolve that fall. Randy Stonehill divorced his wife, Sarah, in September 1980. Although Sarah, who also worked as Larry's secretary at the time, had pleaded to stay together... and only three weeks after the marriage was legally declared over he married Sandi Warner, a young woman he had been seeing in the last days of his marriage to Sarah" (Thornbury: 2018: p. 198). "The fall of 1980 also brought a conclusion to Philip Mangano's relationship with the Street Level Artists Agency, which he sold to the remaining parties involved in the business... "(Thornbury: 2018: p. 199) and on April 15th, 1981 two weeks after Horrendous Disc finally went on sale, Larry Norman and the remaining members of Daniel Amos signed a "Mutual Release and Termination" document freeing the band from all aspects of their contract with Solid Rock and Word (Thornbury: 2018: 276).

The most obvious conclusion as to why the Stonehills marriage ended in divorce in September 1980 is Randy had met someone else who he married 3 weeks later so please show some hard documentary evidence to the contrary Walter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 02:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that this is @AtholMcG: and would appreciate that you sign in. If that's not the case, feel free to comment. It is the same editor as User:205.254.147.8 (the ISPs and location are the same) and a bit of transparency would be appreciated, particularly if there is any association with Thornbury.
I'm collapsing the content to make it easier to read the discussion. I provided an edit summary: WP:PRIMARY and protracted essay.
At first, I confused Thornbury with Allen Flemming. My mistake. Now that I've read-up on the work, it appears he's used other primary sources and qualifies as a secondary source. However, the book isn't out, and so it can't really be used yet: http://www.tollbooth.org/index.php/current-issue/book-reviews/2163-thornbury-gregory-alan-why-should-the-devil-have-all-the-good-music-larry-norman-and-the-perils-of-christian-rock
The protracted quotes are ridiculous overkill. A one paragraph summary of Thornbury's take would suffice.
Divorce does not happen overnight. To smear Randy Stonehill for marrying three weeks after his divorce finalized is futile, but a lot of people in the Solid Rock Army like to use that point. It's just not in any way any proof of who was at fault in the Stonehill divorce. Show us some hard evidence, other than from Larry's recollection, that Randy and his second wife were in a relationship before they divorce proceedings began. Not that this has anything to do with the how the business fell apart.
Finally, don't put words into my mouth. I have not insisted that I know why the meeting was called. I can take the essay apart line by line as well, but this will be a good enough start ad discussion. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:49, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong to assume I am AtholMcG and I have no association with Thornbury other than I have now finished reading an advance review copy of the book. Since my suggested edits were about the crazy finally sentence about Solid Rock ending in 1979 and that being down to an affair between Larry Norman and Sarah Stonehill I am happy to propose a different edit - remove that sentence. Solid Rock did not end in 1979... they released Mark Heard's album that year, Daniel Amos signed and finished work on Horrendous Disc in 1979, The Sky Is Falling was released in 1980 and the point at which Solid Rock began to dissolve was 1980, and even then 2 more Solid Rock albums followed in 1981. I believe it is morally wrong for a biographical entry in wikipedia to end with a sentence saying Solid Rock ended because of an affair between Larry Norman and Sarah Stonehill. Thornbury's book suggests that Stonehill was in another relationship when divorce proceedings began and that ended and he married Sandi Warner a short time after meeting her. Are you saying that after Solid Rock ended in 1979 due to an affair between Larry Norman and Sarah Stonehill that Larry and Randy went ahead and played concert together in Canada in 1980, after sharing a stage together in summer 1979 at Greenbelt as well? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 04:03, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for the Normans divorce while Thornbury quotes Larry writing to Pam reassuring her he will not list her infidelities in the divorce proceedings his biographer takes a different view and spends almost 20 pages cataloguing the breakdown of their marriage, quoting from primary sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 04:11, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the clarification on your identity, and your patience. If you could craft a sentence or two to WP:BALANCE the claims made by reviewers of the film, that would be the best course of action. The four-paragraph long response with extended quotes is not appropriate. Avoid any extended quotes though. Please read Wikipedia:Citing sources and add a proper reference to the work. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:33, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Out of interest why is prominence given to reviewers who interviewed David Di Sabatino when he was promoting the Fallen Angel documentary? He was interviewed on air by Mike Rimmer on Cross Rhythms and was asked whether he was embarrassed by some of the inaccuracies in many of the interviews with local newspapers, where mention was made of Norman losing his mind, retreating from public life after the demise of Solid Rock and living in a cave [he had instead moved to England, signed with Chapel Lane, produced and engineered albums by Alwyn Wall, Shelia Walsh, Lyrix, Norman Barratt and toured extensively in Europe during the time the film reviewers were reporting Norman was rumoured to be living in a cave]. When pressed Di Sabatino responded by saying those inaccuracies were nothing to do with him and were the fault of local reporters misunderstanding things they had googled! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 00:08, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SECONDARY sources are preferred to WP:PRIMARY.
You've entirely taken Larry Norman's statements on his activity in the UK in the early 80s. For instance, "Alwyn Wall would produce a solo album called Invisble Warfare on StarSong in 1982. The latter record was marketed as 'Larry Norman presents Alwyn Wall,' though it is not clear exactly what Norman had to do with the project.Powell, Mark Allan (2002). Encyclopedia of Contemporary Christian Music. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers. p. 558. ISBN 1-56563-679-1.
Similarly, EofCCM states "Future Eyes was coproduced by Husband [Norman] Miller ... and Larry Norman". However, when I spoke with Walsh on her first tour of North America in 1982, she stated rather plainly that Norman remixed and edited "Love in My Life" and "You're so Important to Me". Nothing more, but he was given more prominence in the credits because it was assumed that his name would improve sales, mostly in the US market.
Probably the same with Lyrix. The liner notes clearly state that Larry Norman was the producer. The group was called the Mark Williamson Band and they released two albums under that name. One two years after their Lyrix effort, on Myrrh and one two years before it. Take a look at that 1980 release, which was also on Chappel Lane, and compare it to Song from the Heart. The latter contains one song that was not on Get the Drift: "Susanne". Yet Mr. Norman's name is not listed on the 1980 release. http://www.crossrhythms.co.uk/artists/Mark_Williamson_Band/15267/ https://www.discogs.com/Mark-Williamson-Band-Get-The-Drift-/release/4370338 https://www.discogs.com/Lyrix-Songs-From-The-Heart/master/1115549
For the record, you missed Steve Scott. Nothing ever came of the album that Larry held the rights to. I've conversed with Mr. Scott about it and he didn't expect anything to happen as it was more than thirty years after it was recorded and nothing had happened. In short, it's not clear what Norman's role was in these recordings.
Sure he toured Europe at that time. That's not up for debate. But what are you talking about? You're conflating two separate issues here. Whether reporters did or did not have misinformation about Norman is immaterial to the contents of those interviewed in the film, regardless of how their comments were edited together. You have to prove that the reviewers were taking information from a source other than the film. Without that, it must be assumed that they were informed only by the film. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:36, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Walter, I don't wish things to get personal between us, but I thought this was a wiki page where members of the public can edit and suggest changes but it seems to be you have become the sole arbiter on what can appear on the page, and that would be fine if it was your website or blog the article appears on but it's not. When I was at university I was expected to form a judgement about source material and how reliable sources are. In your most recent reply you yet again rely on a comment in Mark Allen Powell's encyclopedia. Just because Powell isn't clear what Larry's involvement was with Alwyn Wall's "Invisible Warfare" LP doesn't mean the album cover and lyric sheet ( on the 1981 original Chapel Lane UK pressing) aren't crystal clear on the matter: "Produced and arranged by Larry Norman", Backing vocals by Larry Norman and Mark Williamson, Tea by Mark Williamson, More Tea by Larry Norman. The first name mentioned in Alwyn's dedications is "Special thanx to Larry...". Did you publish your conversation with Shelia Walsh in 1982 or record or transcibe it? The Chapel Lane UK pressing of "Future Eyes" doesn't claim Larry produced the session but does list his involvement, broadly in line with your recollection of a 35 year old conversation! You seem to be confusing "Larry Norman Presents" with produced by Larry Norman. Horrendous Disc by Daniel Amos appeared under the "Larry Norman Presents" whilst being produced by Mike Stone. You seem to be reading backwards that if Larry didn't produce "Future Eyes" we can't know if he was involved much in "Invisible Warfare" either. Larry's involvement, since you ask, in Steve Scott's "Moving Pictures" is mentioned alongside Mark Heard's involvement in the project in Matthew Dickerson's "Hammers & Nails" book. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 18:37, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's a valid interpretation. However, I don't think of myself as a an arbiter, but an experienced editor who knows the way that the system works and help to inform and enforce policies, guidelines and manuals of style on the thousands of articles that I watch. That doesn't mean that members of the public can't edit or suggest changes, but I will complain or revert if they are outside of these guidelines. There are many routes and channels to discuss with the broader community. See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. I'm not particularly good at copy editing, especially while adding reliable sources, so I rely on editors like you to do the basic work. I've already commented that the extended quotes are not appropriate, per MOS:QUOTE, but short details, based on the book, are acceptable.
The Powell work isn't a comment, it's a stated fact. It relates to more than one person who wrote about the subject. I won't go further into this, but there is a long history of disputing Norman's claims with multiple counter-claims.
My discussion Walsh discussion is not a reliable source. No confusion on my part with the term about presenting the works. Now care to explain the "produced and engineered albums by Alwyn Wall, Shelia Walsh, Lyrix, Norman Barratt" statement? Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"I rely on editors like you to do the basic work" (Walter Gorlitz) - except you remove every suggested edit I make usually within hours. Now if we go to the previous section where you seem determined to insist a wiki biography on Larry Norman has to end with the claim made by 1 reviewer who watched Fallen Angel that Solid Rock Records ended in 1979 because Larry cheated on Pam, and his long musical collaborator (at that point in his life) Randy and had an affair with Sarah Stonehill. I have already posted that the 1979 date is incorrect, Thornbury's book refers to the date of the meeting and mentions the minutes of the meeting and those present and draws on the tape recording of the 2 hour meeting and quotes Phil Mangano, Randy Stonehill, Ray Ware, Sarah Stonehill and Larry Norman's contributions during the meeting. Thornbury's book has been cleared by editors and the legal team with his publishers. I think it is time you started providing hard evidence why the 1979 is right and hard evidence for the claim Larry Norman had an affair with Sarah Stonehill. Thornbury also publishes lawyers letters about the Normans' divorce as well as correspondence between Larry and Pam, and likewise for the Stonehills and their divorce. Few people once they have read Thornbury's book will be prepared to accept the John Cody article quote as factual. His date for the end of Solid Rock is wrong, and the reason for Solid Rock Records being dissolved is also wrong. David Di Sabatino's quote which I added and you deleted is far closer to the correct date and to the minutes and summary of the meeting in Thornbury. Maybe Di Sabatino's book doesn't count as an admissable source since Jester Media is his own company and he is publishing his own work? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 16:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hyperbole much? Every edit is removed by me?
I do not recall making the claim that the bio had to end with the documentary. If I did, that wasn't the intention. I did state several times that a short summary from Thornbury's biography is acceptable, but—and I provided the link to the talking point above—extended quotes are not appropriate.
I think it's time you stopped attacking me and started actually providing the correct content. You're wrongly accusing me of defending the contents of the article as they stand. I am simply stating that it's referenced to what we assume are reliable sources. If another source comes along with different dates, we show the discrepancy and move on.
I did not delete your addition of the out-of-context content from the article. Do you see how your assumptions are blinding you for what's actually happening? In short, I would have corrected the mis-assumption you offer in that quote. I have that book and referred to it when I saw what had transpired. It was about Stonehill's album and mentions that it was the start of the end of the Solid Rock, but does not claim that it was the ultimate end of the label. If I'm not mistaken, that book is actually part of a dissertation, so I don't know if would count, but your interpretation is just wrong.
Oh, and please sign your posts. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:32, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted it. What he said that the article said did not contradict the basic point. There was turmoil at Solid Rock, both financial and "innuendo." If this guy has a quote that Norman and Finch were NOT having an affair, cite it. Bob Caldwell CSL (talk) 20:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have corresponded with Allen Flemming who is also writing a biography of Larry Norman and has a publisher but hasn't finished his book yet. He did say that he directly asked Sarah (as well as Larry while he was alive) if they had an affair while Larry was married to Pam and while Sarah was married to Randy, and they both firmly and clearly said they did not. The "innuendo" that there was an affair is based on Brad Durham saying he saw Larry's car at Randy's house while Randy was away on tour and Larry was still there in the morning. I'm going to bet that citing my correspondence with Flemming won't count, since nothing Flemming has published from Larry's archives has counted to date. As for Walter's assertion that I have just believed everything Larry has written about his career that's not true. I have my own unpublished book on Larry Norman have corresponded with Norman Stone (film director), Steve Turner (journalist and poet), Mike Rimmer (journalist and broadcaster), Tony Cummings (editor of Cross Rhythms magazine and website), Trevor King (UK promoter 1986-2001), Alan Gibson (Solid Rock UK website owner), Norman Barratt (played live with Larry from 1977 -1989, and recorded with him at Chapel Lane Studios), Dan Cutrona (Keyboard player with Larry live and in the studio and occasional producer and arranger from 1978-2005), Dave Markee (bass player), Paul Shaw (graphic designer, compiler of Belfast Bootlegs 4 CD set and other live compilations), Kerry Hopkins (Larry's former assistant), Charles Norman (Larry's brother), Nancy (Larry's sister), Michael (Larry's son), Andrew Wallace (Jennifer Robinson's former husband), the late Jennifer Robinson (mother of Daniel), Susan Perlman (Jews for Jesus), all the local promoters and support acts on Larry's final UK tour, Derek Robertson (part-time archivist for Solid Rock), Pamela Newman (Larry's first wife), DC Riggot (1977 tour photographer), Glenn Selwitz and Fred Bova (played on Street Level and Bootleg sessions), Pete Meadows (Buzz Magazine and early UK tours in 70's), Miles McKee, Norman Miller to get them to share their memories of working with Larry and to check whether their memories of particular incidents matched what Larry said on stage or in newsletters, linear notes, CD booklets etc. While I don't claim to be an authority on Larry Norman I have done my own independent research with people who shared a flat with him (Stone & Turner), were married to him, had business dealings with Larry, and musicians who worked with Larry from the early 70s through until his final shows.

Normally when people are accused of having an affair and the accusation is being made in print or online the burden of proof lies with those trying to pass off the claim as a stated fact, especially when the supposed affair is being cited as the reason for 2 divorces and the failure of a small record label. At this rate I am almost resigned to having to watch both DVD versions of Fallen Angel again plus the extras and transcribe the relevant sections. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 01:31, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for reliable sources to highlight how dodgy some of the Christian music encyclopedia's are here are some quotes from two of them...

From the Billboard Guide to Contemporary Christian music entry on Larry Norman... "Moving to San Jose, he formed the rock sextet People with guitarist Geoff Levin" (p.209) - Norman wasn't a founder member "A pair of live albums, Street Level and Bootleg, appeared by the end of 1969" (p.210) - Street Level was issued twice with different songs on side 2 - they were all studio recordings, while side 1 had live tracks on it. Street Level wasn't a "live album" and neither was "Bootleg" even though it also had some live tracks on it. Neither of those albums was released in 1969. "Recorded at London's Air Studios with arrangement help from the legendary George Martin..." (p.210) The studio name was A.I.R. Studios and while George Martin was involved in recommending the Triumvirate production team who produced the album, he didn't work as an arranger on any of the songs. He was thanked for his assistance in the linear notes. "In 1980, he formed yet another record label, Phydeaux (named for his dog), through which he released such albums as Something New Under The Son..." (p.211) Something New Under The Son was Larry's final album on the first incarnation of the Solid Rock label. "In 1990, Norman suffered a serious heart attack" (p.211) I suppose he has at least got the decade right and is only 2 years out with this date. In the select discography Street Level and Bootleg are again listed as 1969 releases, So Long Ago The Garden is listed as being released via MGM/Verve (Planet was sold on the Verve label - Garden was a purely MGM pressing with no mention anywhere of Verve).

I make that 10 or 11 factual errors in a 3 and a half page article.

Moving on to Powell's encyclopedia, if you want to take a heat out of the discussion for a bit we could look at some entries other han Larry Norman's just for starters.

J.C. Power Outlet (and Pantano - Salsbury) - page 447 "Their album, Hit The Switch features songs by Pantano though "I'm Just A Record" was cowritten by Norman" Of the 9 songs on the album, 4 are credited to John Pantano, 3 to Ron Salsbury, 1 to John Pantano / Larry Norman, and 1 other song was a cowrite between Ron Salsbury and Jeffrey David Hooven. Despite mentioning David Edwards involvement with the band and his reasons for leaving, when Powell lists the band members from different line ups Edwards isn't listed. "For trivia buffs: Before forming J.C. Power Outlet, Pantano and Salsbury recorded a few songs with Larry Norman that later ended up on his classic Bootleg album" - Larry has said that on the first version of Street Level some of the band performances were cut with session musicians from other people's sessions - he has never listed Pantano & Salsbury among them and the rest of the band studio performances for Street Level and Bootleg featured Fred Bova, Glen Selwitz, Hilly Hillman and sometimes Randy Stonehill as well.

How many errors in that short article?

I don't class myself as an expert on Mark Heard, but I am confident that when Powell says on p.407 that "his career really got started after Pat Terry introduced him to Larry Norman, with whom he worked from 1975 to 1980. On Turning To Dust is actually a reissue of the Mark Heard album and was released on Norman's Solid Rock as well as AB records". There is no sign of Mark Heard working with Larry until work began on Appalachian Melody in 1977 - he's not featured on In Another Land, Welcome To Paradise, View From The Bridge, Hit The Switch, The Sky Is Falling or Something New Under The Son which were all recorded 1975/6- 1977. A debate can be had about when they stopped working. After Appalachian Melody was released Heard left to spend time at L'Abri in 1980 and recorded the "Fingerprint" album in Europe that same year and wasn't present at the meeting in summer 1980 where Solid Rock and Street Level went their separate ways. Larry sang backing vocals on the first few Mark Heard albums for Home Sweet Home Records, and Mark Heard engineered songs at Fingerprint recorders which featured on "The Best Of The Second Trilogy" (1988), "White Blossoms From Black Roots" (1988) and also "Home At Last" (1989). On Turning To Dust was never released on Solid Rock Records either!

Malcolm & Alwyn "Malcolm and Alwyn are probably best known as the subjects of a famous Larry Norman song, "Dear Malcolm, Dear Alwyn" in which he proclaims "I'm your greatest fan" - the exact line in the song is "I guess I'm just your number one fan". When Powell quotes lyrics and refers to song titles he often seems to recall these from memory without actually checking (more of that later).(p.587) "Alwyn Wall would later produce a solo album called Invisible Warfare on StarSong in 1982. The latter record was marketed as "Larry Norman present Alwyn Wall" though it is not clear exactly what Norman had to do with the record" (page 558). I have the original Chapel Lane Records UK pressing of "Invisible Warfare" from 1981. On the album cover it says "Produced and arranged by Larry Norman". There is a lyric sheet insert with other credits about the sessions. Guitar - Vocals - Alwyn; Backing Vocals - Larry Norman, Mark Williamson; Guitars - Norman Barratt; Drums - Russ Caldwell; Keyboards - Dave Morris; Bass Tim Hatwell; Tea - Mark Williamson; More Tea - Larry Norman. Larry is the first name mentioned in Alwyn's dedications - he thanks all the band members an Mr. Mrs Miller (Norman Miller and Shelia Walsh) and Rob & Marion Andrews who ran the Chapel Lane label. As with most Chapel Lane albums recorded at their studios in Hereford a US release often followed a year later.

While Powell might not be clear about Norman's involvement that is probably due to him not listening to the record he writes about (even when he does backing vocals it's not difficult to hear Larry) or having the album to hand either.

Given it's now 3am in the UK I am going to retire for the night and I will answer Walter's requests for info on Larry's credits on other Chapel Lane albums. The only album from that series I don't have is Norman Barratt's "Playing In The City" which was produced by Vic Coppermsith - not sure if Larry did any engineering, mixing, backing vocals or had any input into the artwork for that one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 02:58, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a me-vs-you issue, yet you continue a pissing match. Either come up with content that summarizes the ideas contained in the book or don't. Feel free to keep playing all the games you want. I'm not playing them. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:06, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would rather do something else with my free time as well Walter, believe me! The issue I have is simple - the quote from John Cody on which the article more or less finishes implies Solid Rock ended in 1979 and that it was because of an affair between Larry Norman and Sarah Stonehill. This ending to the entire article has been challenged I don't know how many times and by how many people. It is a matter of public record that In 1979 "Appalachian Melody" was finished and released promptly with no drama. Daniel Amos had begun work on "Horrendous Disc" in June 1978 and spent most of June and July recording it while they were still signed with Maranatha but negotiations were beginning to have it released on another label. In August 1978 CCM mention "Horrendous Disc" will be released soon pending negotiations. By November 1978 masters of Horrendous Disc are assembled and as yet "I Love You #19" and "Hound of Heaven" had not been recorded or mixed and don't feature in this first track list.Masters are also assembled for a planned EP as well which some songs from this first version of the album and other songs which had been demoed but weren't part of the album. December 1978, Daniel Amos sign with Street Level Artists Agency - for concert bookings. By this point Warner / Curb are interested but there is still no deal in place witha record company to release "Horrendous Disc". More recording and mixing for Horrendous Disc takes place in March and April (I Love You #19; Hound of Heaven, Sky King), the last bit of recording was done on "I Believe In You" and the band had agreed a final track list by August 1979. A test pressing was made by Word in September 1979 with the wrong running order. All these dates are taken from Daniel Amos timeline on the band's own website. The DA website says it was December 1978 before they joined Street Level Artists Agency and were told if you are with Street Level you have to have a record deal with Solid Rock as well... so they sign over Horrendous Disc to Solid Rock - the band seem to think that having bought the rights to Horrendous Disc Larry was going to get a secular company to release / distribute it.

Anyway, why am I raising Horrendous Disc timelines here? Because DA's own timeline shows them still working on new material for Horrendous Disc in 1979 after they signed with Solid Rock - Horrendous Disc was not presented as a finished piece when they signed. It wasn't until 13 months after the band told CCM about "Horrendous Disc" that the track listing was agreed by the band and a test pressing was done with the wrong songs in the wrong order. The band's timeline says that they didn't listen to the test pressing until early 1980. Solid Rock ran an advert for it in November 1979 in CCM. In October 1979 DA's "Horrendous Tour" begins - presumably they are expecting this to tie in with the album release or around the release date. It does seem strange that when sessions were spread out over 15 months and its your first album on a new label that no one in the band has listened to a test pressing by this stage.

Daniel Amos timeline says that the photo session for the cover of HD doesn't take place until 1980. In January 1980 DA and Randy Stonehill finish up their tour and Larry Norman joins them on stage... (after Solid Rock Records is in its death throes according to John Cody and after everyone at Solid Rock who isn't named Larry Norman believes Larry is having an affair with Sarah Stonehill).

DA's timeline quotes May 1980 as the date when Larry releases them from their management contract with Street level and Street level splits from Solid Rock. Thornbury quotes Norman writing to DA on 24th April 1980 which is probably the letter the band receives when they get back from tour. Things seem amicable between Larry and the band at this stage - they have been back in touch with Warners about having HD released through them. May 1980 is when Thornbury dates a huge fall out between Norman and Phil Mangano to 1st May 1980 where Larry sent a 40 page letter airing his grievances. 17th June 1980 was the date where a meeting was called, "The purpose of the meeting was to clear up the relationship between Solid Rock and Street Level Artists Agency, and to deal with a request from Daniel Amos to have all their contracts back from Solid Rock - management, recording, tapes, publishing, and so on" (Thornbury: 2018: p.190).

As far as I can see from Thornbury and DA's own timeline the band were quite happy on Solid Rock throughout 1979, they were playing plenty of gigs and hadn't finished work on HD until late into the summer of 1979. When a test pressing was sent out in September 1979 they didn't listen to it until early in 1980 and no cover artwork had been done until early 1980... when they seem happy enough to share a stage with Larry as well as Randy. Still maybe John Cody is right and Thornbury has a faulty set of minutes with the wrong date on them and DA have got all their dates on their timeline wrong too.

Maybe Matthew Dickerson also has his dates wrong when he say Mark and Larry were co-producing Steve Scott's "Moving Pictures" and working on that from 1978-80 - Mark's sessions for "Appalachian Melody" were also spread out from 1977-79.

Stonehill's "The Sky Is Falling" also finally gets released in 1980 and around that time he does a few final shows on a double bill with Larry Norman that spring... once again pretty strange if he held the view his marriage to Sarah was heading for divorce because she had an affair with Larry. It is also strange that Randy speaks up in Larry's defence at the meeting on 17th June 1980 saying that he thought Larry was entitled to some sort of compensation if DA moved to another record label and HD was released through a new label when money had been invested in the band by Word and Solid Rock... if DA wanted all their contracts and tapes and publishing back and Solid Rock had funded some of that then Randy says if DA go Larry shouldn't be out of pocket as a result... another strange turn of events when the meeting is supposed to be an intervention to confront Larry about his "affair" with Sarah.

Please show some evidence from published sources that 1979 is the correct date for the demise of Solid Rock and please demonstrate why the demise id down to the "affair" between Larry and Sarah, and nothing to do with the massive fall out between Larry and Phil or Word complaining Solid Rock have never once delivered 4 albums per year that Word wanted to release. Do that and I'll stop posting. No desire for a pissing contest, just some balance on the final paragraph which brings the article to a close. Simples! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can I propose, that if a few people strongly want to keep the John Cody quote about 1979 and about an affair between Larry and Sarah Stonehill being the cause of the demise of Solid Rock Records that in addition to saying Charles Norman refutes those claims that a couple of sentences (at most) is added summarising Thornbury's chapter on the episode, or Thornbury's book has its own section in the way that Fallen Angel does? If people are agreeable my suggested couple of sentences would be along the lines of:

Gregory Alan Thornbury's biography of Norman proposes an alternate date and reason for Solid Rock Records being wound up and the artists released from their contracts. According to him, Word Records signalled they planned to end their relationship with Solid Rock due to poor sales performances of a few of the albums and the infrequent nature of releases being delivered by the label [I can add 2 references here] and this news led to a breakdown in the working and personal relationship between Larry Norman and Philip Mangano in May 1980 [I can add a reference here]. Discussions had already begun about some artists being released from their contracts prior to the meeting on 17th June 1980 which was called to resolve financial and legal tensions between Street Level Artists Agency (handling concert bookings for the artists) and Solid Rock (the record label) ad which ended 2 hours later in acrimony rather than resolution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.129.113.229 (talk) 23:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

General inaccuracies and errors

[edit]

I am reading through the article section by section, and have noted several inaccuracies. I propose working my way through them over time, and will post here before editing, in case anyone suggests better wording etc. In the 'Early Bands' section it is implied that Larry supported The Doors and Jimi Hendrix prior to joining People! I do not believe this is true and am unaware of any evidence at all to support. I suggest rewording "After graduating, Norman continued performing and opened at local concerts for The Doors and Jimi Hendrix.[4][28]" to "After graduating, Norman continued performing locally.". I don't believe references 4 and 28 mean anything for this proposed sentence, but they could be moved to the following paragraph as additional references for People! having supported these acts. Alternatively, we could just remove the sentence altogether as opposed to rewording it. AtholMcG (talk) 21:44, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change per above now made. Also within the 'Early bands' section are the following issues: Reference 33 does not support I Love You reaching 'number one in several markets'. It might be true that it did but I propose rewording from "and reaching No. 1 in several markets" to "and charting strongly in several markets". I also propose rewording "Norman left People! before Capitol released the band's first album in the summer of 1967, but reunited with Mason for concerts in 1980 and 2006." to "Norman left People! just as Capitol released the band's first album in the summer of 1968, but reunited with Mason for concerts in 1974 and 2006." - Larry left the band on or very close to the day the album was released. The I Love You single was released in January 1968 and the album followed months later. The only People! release in 1967 was the single Organ Grinder. Also, the Israel Tapes was recorded in 1974, not 1980. 1980 was just the album release date. It may be worth noting that Denny Fridkin (People! drummer) was also part of the 2006 reunion concert. AtholMcG (talk) 20:00, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful with words like "summer", "spring", etc. See MOS:SEASON. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK. We can say "mid-1968", or just "1968". AtholMcG (talk) 20:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Referring to Solid Rock, part of the ‘Recording Career’ section says: "Norman produced music on the label for artists including Randy Stonehill, Mark Heard, Tom Howard,[77] and David Edwards.[78]”. The David Edwards entry in reference 78 actually says: "In 1973, he became bass player for J.C. Power Outlet, one of the foremost non-Calvary Chapel bands associated with the Jesus movement. He left the group in 1975 to pursue a solo career, signing a contract with Larry Norman's Solid Rock. This began a multi-year quest for what Norman called 'ten great songs', a seemingly unattainable goal that proved both discouraging and inspiring to the artist. "We'll enter the studio as soon as you have ten great songs," Norman told Edwards year after year until the latter finally found a new producer. Many of Norman's charges experienced similar frustrations, but years later Edwards would remember the imposed sabbatical with mixed emotions, admitting that it spared him 'the lifelong embarrassment' of having some early songs recorded”” — This quote doesn’t in any way say that David Edwards was recorded on Solid Rock - it as good as says he wasn’t. I therefore suggest that we remove the mention of David Edwards from this sentence. The section goes on to say: “Norman also produced artists who were signed to other labels, including Malcolm and Alwyn, Bobby Emmons and the Crosstones, Lyrix, and James Sundquist.[79][80][81][82]” — What is the relevance of references 80 and 82, which have no mention of Larry or Solid Rock? What is the relevance of reference 81, which indicates that the Sundquist album was produced by people other than Larry? Which Malcolm And Alwyn release did Larry produce? I suggest that we reword to “Norman also worked with several artists who were signed to other labels, including Malcolm and Alwyn, Bobby Emmons and the Crosstones, Lyrix, David Edwards and James Sundquist.[78][79][81]”. AtholMcG (talk) 14:31, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Above suggestions now implemented. AtholMcG (talk) 19:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am kind of confused about the argument about Larry's infidelity and affair with Sarah Stonehill. I saw Larry and Randy at an off-campus very small concert at Biola University in late 1980 and there did not seem to be any animosity between the two. They were singing and messing around like they always did when they were together. They even sang an impromptu version of the Beach Boys "Little Surfer Girl" with Randy TRYING to hit the high notes. Then we had Randy Stonehill for a benefit concert in 1981 over at Melodyland Christian Center in Anaheim. I remember he spoke of Larry as his "closest friend". Was this all a big act on Randy's part? If the guy had cheated with MY wife I wouldn't act like that? 147.0.222.71 (talk) 05:28, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Larry_Norman&oldid=1233685656"