Talk:Ian Levine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedian An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Ian Levine, has edited Wikipedia as
86.132.159.246 (talk · contribs)

Contents

[edit] Paying Artists

Why is it that Mr Ego Levine can get away without paying artists?

in the 80's and 90's Levine recorded many artists over in Detroit and then came back to the UK and has been living off the proceeds of their work for over a decade. The thing is he never paid these people for what they did.

Frances Nero gave him a UK number one in the 80's with Footsteps, something that would have made him tens of thousands in royalties alone and yet francfes struggles to make ends meet because the snake did not pay her a penny for that song.

How can he get away with that?

[edit] Comics collection

I'm a bit concerned that the information about Ian Levine's comic collection may not be verifiable. It currently reads as if it might have been added by Levine himself or a friend of his. Unless there's been some media coverage of Levine's comic book collection which could be cited to support the statements in the article, I think it may have to be deleted — even though I do think the idea of a complete collection of DC comics is noteworthy, we have to restrict ourselves to verifiable information. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 09:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

It is true, but I cannot find a source online to verify it. He has discussed it on several forums recently though.- Reverend Malibu
Generally, forum postings aren't considered a reliable source, but I'll let someone else make the judgment in this case. It would be much better if we could have coverage from some media source. It doesn't need to be online (although that, of course, is easiest) — if Levene's collection has been discussed or covered in a comics publication like Comic Buyers' Guide or Wizard that would do.
It would also be good if we could have a source for Levene's claim to have written Attack of the Cybermen, just for the sake of the verifiability policy. (I don't doubt that he's said it, but we should be able to back it up, especially since it's a potentially contentious issue.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:39, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
I'll check it when I get back home - there's an old, old (well, we're all old now) DWB interview, I think, where he says this. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 05:52, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ian Levine Picture

Forgive my amatuerness, but how do I get this picture approved for permanent usage on the website. It's a pretty common picture- Reverend Malibu

The question that has to be answered is what its copyright status is. Do you know where it was originally published? (That is, where TVCream got it from?) In order to stay on Wikipedia, it'll need to have some sort of image copyright tag. I'm not very sure about these myself, as most such photos need a fair use claim, which I'm not sure would apply in this case. Perhaps someone at the help desk might be able to assist you more. Good luck! —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
On the subject of images, does anybody else think the one currently on the page is a bit unfortunate? It looks like one of those photos you see in a newspaper of a criminal who's been surprised while walking outside his home. Angmering 06:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cancellation protest

Is this worth mentioning in the article, and if so, how? I'd think that it would be appropriate, especially if we can also find a reliable source commenting on how many Doctor Who fans were (or are now, in hindsight) a bit embarassed about that particular stunt... —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 07:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

You see, I think something like that is worth mentioning, though I can see the arguement against-- no one likes having their dirty laundry aired in public and all that jazz. Still, it seems odd to have an article on Ian Levine without mention of that, or any of the DWB articles, or even the Missing Episode segment of Doctor Who and the Daleks: it's beyond petty parts of fan circles; these are big events that happened in a far wider arena than just an Internet forum. So, yes, I think it should be mentioned, because without it you're only getting one side of the story; just as all the positive parts in this article should stay, so this should appear: you shouldn't have one without the other or else it makes things look biased, which is an accusation I wouldn't like to see levelled at this article any time time soon.

82.153.26.144 18:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Abzorbaloff

Is it really necessary for Wikipedia to feature a bitchy rumour about Levine in relation to the supposed resembelance between him and the character played by Peter Kay? A remark of this nature might just about me justifiable in the description of the episode, but what relevance does it have to Levine personally? Rob 20:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I certainly wouldn't weep if it was removed; it may be cited as speculation by some people, but it's still speculation. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 00:45, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
I think it's notable. There's 'a long-standing fan myth' in there as well, after all. Jim 04:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
How can there be any deliberate resemblance between Levine and the Abzorbaloff when the latter was the result of a design-a-monster competition in a children's TV show? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.19.57.170 (talk) 13:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC).
The purported resemblance is not in the monster's appearance, but in the role the Abzorbaloff plays in the episode. See the essay here for one perspective on Levine and the Abzorbaloff. It might be more accurate to say that the resemblance isn't to the Abzorbaloff monster per se, but to Victor Kennedy, the man who takes charge of the "fan" group and takes the fun out of it. (Please note that I'm not saying Levine did anything of the sort in Doctor Who fandom, but there are people who apparently think he did.) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 14:29, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removed section per WP:BLP

I've removed this paragraph, because without citations it violates WP:BLP. Frankly, I'm not sure that it would be particularly encyclopedic even if citations were provided, but in the absence of citations there's really no justification for its inclusion.

As mentioned above, Levine is sometimes viewed as a controversial member of fandom, with critics citing his temper and attitude as unfavourable. However, others claim that he simply loves the show and that his behaviour, whilst arguably erratic and sometimes forceful, is but a sign of his dedication, and frustration that sometimes things go badly wrong with it.
Of late, various public arguments have occured in relation to a rumour concerning the cancellation of the new series of Doctor Who, and in relation to projects concerning the recolourisation of The Ambassadors of Death and more recently with plans to reanimate missing episodes of the series, in the style of the DVD release of The Invasion, an idea that was eventually shelved, for now at least.

With the latter, Levine felt that plans publically announced were a personal slight against him, and a conspiracy was underway to ridicule him and undermine his own personal actions in regard to animating the episodes. However, this has been denied by all involved with the announcment, and many who heard the news regarded it as a positive step forward for Levine's project as opposed to a hindrance.

Has any of this been discussed in reliable sources? (That is, somewhere outside of internet fora?) I know that Doctor Who Magazine made a passing and oblique satirical reference to Levine's meltdown last year over the possible cancellation of Doctor Who after the 2008 series, but has it been explicitly mentioned anywhere else? What about the tempest-in-a-teapot over the colourisation of The Ambassadors of Death or the collapse of the animation plans? If they've only been discussed on internet fora like Outpost Gallifrey's forum, the Restoration Team forum, or Levine's own forum, they're not notable enough for Wikipedia's purposes. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:42, 3 May 2007 (UTC)


RESPONSE

This is certainly true; however I would argue that Levine's online persona is very much part of both who he is, and how people know him to be, so it seems a tad odd to totally remove all reference to recent events, especially with being so prominent in the eyes of fandom. I totally agree in principal about online forums not being valid sources, but in this instance its absence seems odd. Added to this, I felt the wording was generally considerate and far from the vile outburst it could so easily have been (Levine has his detractors in bucket loads for certain, and I half-expected to see vandalism of this section.)

[edit] Darren Gregory

Maybe I'm misremembering but I seem to recall that Gregory was a notorious 'missing episode' hoaxer, so probably not really a friend of Levine? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.6.159 (talk) 22:53, 22 October 2007 (UTC) Having said all this, I completely understand why it's been removed and why it shouldn't be there: please do not feel I'm trying to anger, poke fun at, or question your actions, as I really am not-- I think you were right to do what you did. I'm just curious-- honestly not trying to provoke or anything-- about your views on the area in general: should more mention be made to avoid an accusation of being biased, and if so, how should anyone go about it?

82.153.26.144 23:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I really don't think there are enough reliable published sources around to go into this sort of thing. Nor, really, should Wikipedia be bothering itself with the details of some sci-fi shows fandom wranglings. Angmering 17:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)