Talk:James Blunt/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Instruments played

It seems to me like he just plays the guitar and piano. Think we could edit down the list? M.C. Brown Shoes 11:24, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree, the list does seem a bit rediculous. Unfortunately I cant find any reliable source for what instruments he plays... Thing is, any fool could play a marimba, doesnt mean he could play it well. Until we can get some info though, best to not remove them I think. What we could do is get rid of things like 'Grand piano' we've already said he can play Piano so it seems a bit redundant. Church organ too, I find it doubtful that he regularly plays that. I don't think the pump organ is a particularly noteworthy instrument either. What do you think? M A Mason 13:23, 24 September 2005 (UTC)
Ah. I'm the one who put that on, when I made the article. I wanted to beef the text up a bit to be honest. The source of all those instruments is in the lyrics booklet to the album (dunno if it's in the new -blue- version, I've got the old skool one), but I agree, it does make the article seem very unwieldy and link-heavy. I think the first poster is right, we should probably only list his main instruments, guitar and piano. BTW, it's been great watching this article 'cos NOBODY had heard of him when I made the article back in May. Just watching the amount of fansites cropping up on the links bit and seeing the other contributors starting to get involved was quite interesting... Dragonfly888 20:27, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
I noticed that someone had added all the instruments again, so removed them. Not becasue I want an edit war, but because I really feel like it lowers the tone of the article. We need to give concise, accessible information, and listing all the variations of the different instruments that he plays certainly doesn't do this. M A Mason 22:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

James Blunt plays piano, guitar, pump organ and bellow organ. he can (as a matter of fact) play it very well.

[edit] Rhyming Slang

I've just noticed the edit by someone about James Blunt being rhyming slang for This is, probably true... so should it get axed or what?

True or not, it is neither necessary nor relevant; so yeah - axed. M A Mason 18:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
The correct rhyming slang for is Berkshire Hunt methinks. Jellypuzzle 16:24, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
I removed it -Wiccan Quagga 10:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
I thought James was rhyming slang for but because of James Hunt not Blunt?--Symon 14:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
I just wondered why it wasn't there so I added it, but I didn't know it had previously been removed. I think a lot of people do use it now, even if it's not "official". Sweetie Petie 12:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, it was there all along. I didn't read the article, just searched for the appropriate word :S Sweetie Petie 10:35, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
If you'd like a source, I believe it originated due to a skit on "Dead Ringers," where the song "You're Beautiful" was sung with the lyrics changed.
There's also a line in Mitch Benn's "I may just have to murder James Blunt". "He's the only man alive who is is own rhyming slang."
Just because 2 parodies say it's rhyming slang, that doesn't make it so. "Berkshire Hunt" is the official term for "cunt". "James Blunt" is not. If we include it here, we create it as a ryhming slang rather than report it as a rhyming slang. It should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.101.139.252 (talk) 02:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


James Blunt is cockney rhyming slang for 'cunt'! 90.192.92.47 23:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Well he is a James...

[edit] Birth Year

There seems to be a bit of confusion over Mr Blunt's birth year. 1974 was the date on here (the article gives a not very good excuse for it being so: why do the tabloids believe it is the year on his passport?) but I've just changed it to 1977. My source is an article in last week's (October 16) Mail On Sunday's Night and Day magazine, entitled 'Desert Island Downloads: James Blunt's top MP3 tracks'. When quizzed about his musical tastes Blunt replied, "I'm only 28 but when I was at school I listened to seventies music: Pink Floyd, Led Zepplin, Supertramp - that kind of thing." Unless he is lying about his age (why would he?) I'd say that was pretty conclusive evidence that he was born in 1977. Crisso 12:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I think Blunt's words are the best source we're going to get and the article should reflect this. I for one don't believe the tabloids, and fansites are probably even less reliable. Perhaps we could email his agent, or someone in the know to shed light on this issue? M A Mason 15:08, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
"Unless he's lying about his age (why would he?)" If his target audience is teenage girls, then admitting he's 31 would make him look really old and affect his popularity. 28 sounds much better. 83.70.79.224 19:25, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Startling evidence from his record label has his date of birth to be 22/10/68, probably from his licence. (unsigned contribution from anoon 147.226.224.120 done on 5 Oct 2006 at 5.42)
No substantiating information, the date of birth will be returned to previous. Risker 06:21, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Pending further sourcing of speculative dates, i've removed the birth date para. - it kinda brought the article down IMO..... Petesmiles 00:02, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

James Blunt's age has been the subject of considerable discussion in the media ever since he became well-known. There have been varying reports giving his year of birth as 1974, 1976, 1977 and 1978. Most recent reports (including People Magazine (US Edition), December 5, 2005) give his age as 31, making his year of birth 1974. A recently discovered article, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/main.jhtml?xml=/travel/1999/11/06/etant06.xml , which was written by Jane Blount (mother of James Blunt) in 1999, states that he was 25 years old at that time. This supports the year of birth of 1974. One would think that a boy's mother would be a reliable source for his date of birth. As a newbie, I would appreciate the assistance of a more experienced member in reviewing this information and editing. Risker 05:02, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I was at Harrow with the guy and don't remember him. I'm 28 and he definitely wasn't in my year. A friend of mine two years above (now 31 and born in 1974) does remember him from his year. The stuff about 1977 is nonsense. --Jamesedmo 17:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Wow thanks, I think that's pretty good evidence, good enough for me anyway. An independant source seems best to me. Still puzzled about him saying that he's 28, though; I think if we can't find a source for this we should change it. Especially considering we also have an article from his mother stating that he was in fact born in '74. M A Mason 17:42, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It looks as though Blunty was telling porkies. I'd wouldn't have thought that an artist like him, a singer-songwriter who seems more interested in the music than the image, should be pandering to his young fans by lying about his age, if indeed that's why he did. Crisso 18:57, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

I'd just like to say that whether he was born in '77 or '74 or whatever, he'd still be WAY to young to be in a "club with you in 1973". They wouldn't even serve him. Do they serve formula in clubs? —Preceding unsigned comment added by GrandpaGroove (talk • contribs) 18:37, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AWARDS

AWARDS: I've removed the reference to him winning the "worst album" award in the NME awards .... just feel its not neccessary

I removed it at first thinking it was vandalism lol, must just be me paranoid :P. Having said that I agree with you, it doesn't really contribute anything to the article. Who by the way decided that it was the worst album? And on what basis? The fact that it was at number one for however many weeks? No. Personally I wouldn't take these awards seriously, especially one for worst album. I suppose you could argue, though, that we're 'censoring' the article? And not showing everyone's opinion. I don't know - disucssion is possibly necessary if others think it should be kept. M A Mason 00:10, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
The NME Awards are pretty major, but NME is into indie rock rather acoustic ballads like James Blunt sings. It definitely shouldn't be under awards, but perhaps a quick mention in the Criticism section would be good. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 19:49, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I added the worst album addition, it is as it states 'an award' and by removing it, you are effectively censoring the article. Regardless of who chose the award for him, (the same goes for any other award he has) he still received it. Therefore there is no fault in listing it under his awards.

[edit] Television and Radio Appearances

Since James Blunt has had so many television and radio appearances in so many countries over the past year, and his music has been played on programs around the world, I have removed specific references and included general regions. I did, however, include his acting debut, as it is a significantly different fact. Does this make sense? Risker 05:16, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I'm noticing that additional details about US television appearances are being added. Are these useful or should we return to the general statements? It would be easy to come up with a list of dozens or possibly hundreds of TV/Radio appearances worldwide (many of which were far more important in Blunt's success), but I don't think that is the purpose of this article. Discussion, anyone? Risker 15:38, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

But what about when he was on Sesame Street? He's one of the many singers who did that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.111.15.73 (talk) 00:29, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mischa Barton

Should we not mention that The OC star Mischa Barton played the lead role in Blunt's video for his song, Goodbye My Lover?

[edit] Birthyear error

Why is the year of birth in the first sentence 1974, when the article is categorized as 1977 births... obviously one of those is wrong. Pepeeg


We really need to reach a clear consensus on this. Here are the facts as I see them:

  • In support of 1974 we have a sourced article from his mother (see above), and the seemingly reliable testimony from a wikipedian (again see above). Neither would have any reason to lie. Especially in light of the fact that the article was published before he was famous.
  • In support of 1977 we have an unsourced article, which apparently contains Blunt's words. He would however have reason to lie, better for his fans to think he was younger rather than older.

In light of this I suggest we change both the opening and the category to 1974 and leave a note to future editors to read the discussion before changing it. M A Mason 22:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

  • In support of 1974, his latest video for the re-release of "Wisemen" shows him burning a passport that is purportedly his, and the date of birth on the passport is February 22, 1974. Risker 16:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion to Remove Plagiarised Information

User Petadeo has made multiple extensive edits to this entry. These edits consist almost entirely of direct quotes from various published and copyrighted articles about Blunt. User Petadeo has been asked by at least two Wikipedians to remove these sections, but has not yet done so, and this entry has been added to the "Copyright Violation" list. However, as this is a relatively active entry, I have reverted to a previous version now rather than risk having other Wikipedians expend their talents editing information that will ultimately be removed. Risker 04:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Folk Rock?

This article lists his genre as Folk Rock. Is he really in the same category as Fairport Convention, Pentangle and Steeleye Span?

I would say a big resounding 'no' to that. Is it even rock music of any sort at all? Sounds a lot like the usual overmarketed blandness to me.

His MySpace account labels him as Folk Rock, if that's any proof of anything at all. --Jude 22:37, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
I always refer to him as 'housewife rock' but 'folk rock' is the closest accepted term, I think. --Sam Blanning (formerly Malthusian) (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Adult contemporary.

'Folk rock' can be a bit of a catch-all, but there's enough acoustic guitar and mellowness for Blunt to qualify I think. The alternative is just to lump it in with 'pop' but again, that covers everything from Girls Aloud to the Chili Peppers. If James Blunt says it's folk rock, then we may as well leave it at that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.122.88 (talk) 16:48, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fansite links

I notice that someone has removed all the fansite links - I do appreciate that the list was getting a bit excessive, but surely some should be allowed to remain? Perhaps others would like to comment? Should we have some sort of guidelines as to what is acceptable? (like when it was last updated etc?) XxbagpussxX 22:55, 7 March 2006 (UTC) XxbagpussxX

If it was me, I would keep things as they are, revision: 22:52, 7 March 2006. We've got the official site, an unofficial site, a forum, an article, and an interview. All bases covered so to speak. I suppose the difficulty is in deciding if the links we have are the right ones, should we use one fansite as opposed to another, for example; as you say guidelines might be useful... but impossible to decide upon I fear. I say leave things as they are. M A Mason 23:11, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, I removed the links again before looking at this talk. I would be happy to leave one, which is baisically what Wikipedia:External links suggests. However, I wouldn't know which one - perhaps a decerning editor might be able to help there? If one was added again, I wouldn't remove it. I think that edits to forums are discouraged, though. Robdurbar 23:38, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Well, having had the opportunity to have reviewed all of the links before they were removed, I would recommend that Monkey King's Amazing Facts be reinstated. It isn't a forum, it is a fact site and so is quite different from most fansites. As well, I would support one of the forums being included. One like Speaking Bluntly, which includes links to reference sources rather than simply copying articles from other sources without proper attribution, would be preferable. I will keep an eye on what gets posted here. Risker 16:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I will re-add Monkey Kings Amazing Facts now, although I would like to hear other peoples views on its inclusion. I respect that others may want to remove it again and if so I will not re-add the link. --Fentiger 19:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm pleased my comments have produced serious discussion on this. It is difficult to decide on which would be the "best" ones to include, I have re-added Speaking Bluntly purely because "Risker" has singled it out - if there is debate or feelings that this should be removed then I would respect that. I do also have links to most of the fansites I am aware of on there, and should it be decided that no other fansites should be linked here, then I'd welcome emails from the admins of those other sites and I'd include their site on my list too. XxbagpussxX 21:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

After side discussion with Robdurbar, the first forum-type fansite has been returned to the article. Thanks. Risker 20:51, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

A link to a site about Lukas Burton was added, which I have removed. There are already references to him in the BBC articles posted. There is currently a legal case by Lukas Burton claiming producers rights, not co-writer credits as this link suggested and I feel to have him listed at the moment is not wise until the case has been settled one way or the other XxbagpussxX 21:20, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Removed link to a lyrics site which has an incomplete listing of Blunt lyrics. All lyrics are available on Monkey King's Amazing Facts. 69.156.148.239 02:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia Section

The information currently in this section is specific to two of Blunt's songs, each of which has its own Wikipedia article. Would anyone object if this information was moved to the articles for the individual songs? Risker 11:46, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Copy the information to the song pages, but leave them here too, since they do have a wider connection to Blunt as a whole. -RomeW 11:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Folk rock, free speech, middle class administrators...

James Blunt is not a practitioner of folk rock. His music is a mixture of pop, commercial folk, and conventional soft rock. I will change the article to acknowledge this. It will be totally unfair if I am blocked for doing so (which has previously been the case). And if people do not like Blunty then they have just as much right as those who like him to voice their opinion. Saying complimentary things abnout him is just as much POV as say derogatory things, only it seems complimentary things do not arouse the middle class administrators into using their blocking powers. Long live free speech and balance in Wikipedia articles! 213.121.151.142 19:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC) and Ask me 23:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comparisons with Elton John, Jazz and Northern soul

Could someone please tell me how James Blunt sounds anything like early Elton John? This is surely a statement of POV, and therefore should be removed, or at least justified with examples of musical similarity. And how does Blunt music resemble Jazz, or Northern soul - and if his music does, (which, by the way, it doesn't), why is his genre described as Folk Rock? - this article is a mess of contradictory, false and misleading information, and if anyone tries to clean it up, it just gets reverted back or the person making the changes gets blocked. 213.121.151.142 19:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC) and Ask me 23:58, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Your point is well taken, Ask me. I believe that those categorizations were made by various music critics in articles that aren't properly referenced here. I think there are some problems with several other pieces of information treated as fact, as well. Perhaps some of the more frequent editors of this article need to work together to properly reference the material in this article. Would you be willing to participate?Risker 04:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
    • It's a trend to call music jazz that actually isn't jazz at all. This is another one. I removed the jazz part. I'd say it only deserves to be placed back if someone can provide a quote by a renowned jazz musician saying Blunt's music resembles jazz. MrTroy 21:42, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "backlash" quote

Regarding the text: 'An example of the Blunt backlash can be seen by an American writer's reaction the VH1 network's claim that Blunt had "an angelic voice". The writer reponded by noting "this artist's delivery more closely resembles Rod Stewart being molested in a prison shower..." [1]' The link goes to a brief joke on a blog. Should this be considered notable? 68.35.68.100 00:26, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it is notable because it offers a view of Blunt's voice, and it is mildly funny and entertaining. However, it would probably be appropriate to include a quotation that is supportive of blunt, maybe in the section under Singing career for balance sake. Ask me
    • It's a joke, it's not a fact, a quote or even a comment by a published music critic. It doesn't belong in an encyclopedia article. Perhaps in Wikipedia:Bad Jokes and Other Deleted Nonsense. I have removed it for this reason. Risker 04:17, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
In retrospect, i suppose the quotation was inappropriate for an encyclopedia article, I guess I just found it a bit funny. Ask me


[edit] Early life

No way as a Lieutenant would Blunt have commanded 30,000 troops. Someone has obviously got their facts wrong.

Answer: He was a captain, not a lieutenant, when he led the troops into Pristina.

Ummm, no, he was a lieutenant. See this contemporaneous article, where he is quoted about three quarters of the way through. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/inatl/longterm/balkans/stories/kosovo061399.htm 64.228.212.71 03:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

he wasnt commanding the troops he was leading them acting as the vangaurd and forward scout of the force however i doubt he was in charge just one of the many lieutenants in the forward element.Corustar 02:43, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

The wording implies that he was in charge, it needs editing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.116.249 (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] University

Can anyone provide a cite for Blount attending Bristol University? James attended Bristol Polytechnic, now called something more inspiring like "The University of the West of England". Same town, altogether different institution. --5telios 11:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Have been reading articles and interviews (print and online) over the course of the weekend and uniformly they refer to him graduating from Bristol University. His dissertation was reportedly "The Commodification of Image - Production of a Pop Idol." Of course, they could all be referencing each other; nonetheless, the publications included the London Times, EMI on-line biography (EMI is his music publisher) [1], and the Washington Post. Bristol Polytechnic was renamed to the University of the West of England in 1992, which would have been considerably before Blunt graduated. Perhaps a resource would be matriculation lists for 1995 or 1996, when he would have graduated - but I am on the wrong side of the pond to access. Risker 02:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
Just discovered this, which confirms Blunt graduated from University of Bristol in 1996 with a BSc in sociology. [2] Risker 21:20, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Does James Blunt sing like Alanis?

In the U.S. we have a popular sketch comedy show called MADtv that mocked Blunt with a parody of "You're Beautiful" in which Blunt was played by Nicole Parker---a woman who actually has a striking resemblance physically and vocally to Blunt. I saw the parody before I heard the song on the radio. Only when I heard the real song I got the joke, for I was immediately struck by the strong similarity between Blunt's voice and the voice of Alanis Morissette. I believe this similarity is what Mad TV was trying to make fun of. Has anyone else noticed this? If so, it might be worth mentioning in the article. --Coolcaesar 06:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

On the topic of parody, there has been another one made of "You're Beautiful" [3] by a British comedy show, Dead Ringers, should this example be included as well?

[edit] I have a problem with the Singles Chart

While I recognize that some people have gone to a good deal of work on this chart, there are several problems with it. First of all, each of those singles have their own articles, as does the album Back to Bedlam itself. And all of those have charts. Secondly, and more importantly, the chart is inaccurate. Two of these singles had two releases (High and Wisemen) but there is only one entry for them on this chart, and each includes bits of information from each release. Unless someone can come up with a good reason to retain this chart, I will delete it. Risker 21:31, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Please delete the table because the way it was was much easier to read and the table is incorrect

I agree that there are inaccuracies on this table, but it does look better than just a list etc ... I would go in and attempt to edit the info myself, but the table thing has thrown me! XxbagpussxX 22:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discography

RE: Australia position for 'High'

I am 100% sure that the song 'High' did not peak at #16 in Australia, nor did it even break the top 40. If memory serves me correctly this song peaked between #40 and #60, this is because he was not popular yet at the time.

[edit] Who knew that You're Beautiful was played during the memorial for Jane Creba?

I'm guessing other Riverdale students use Wikipedia too, because it was a very private memorial that no newscasters were allowed to set foot inside.

[edit] NPOV in "Reactions" section"

There's definetely a fair bit of bias here but I'm not quite sure what to do with this section. What do we think? M.C. Brown Shoes 06:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

NPOV means Neutral Point of View, so you just shot your own premise in the face. Haizum 22:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronounciation of real name

It should be noted that Blunt is merely a phonetic representation of Blount. Can anyone add the IPA to show this? Amo 21:52, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] on fire

The re-release video for "Wisemen" has Blunt burning identification papers, and then walking through a forest while on fire.

Which is on fire: Blunt or the forest? The Wednesday Island 14:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Both. 67.71.87.187 05:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Great singer!

James Blunt did a good job when he wrote this album. His songs are perfect. I think he belongs to the group of singers that are the best in the world. He has got a nice voice, too.

Lenka 44

Don't be such a James - he sucks monkeys balls

[edit] Spelling

Just a note to all, could you all please remember to use UK spelling in the article. I've changed Fall to Autumn and program to programme. Cheers. hedpeguyuk 29 June 15:20 {UTC}

There's no "please use British English" notice in the article, so you can't demand this. If you want the article to be BrE then include a notice. MrTroy 15:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, according to wikipedia UK English should be used for UK-centred articles and, for any "neutral" article, whichever form of English that was used first should remain for consistancy. Last time I checked Blunt was British. I wouldn't have thought that an the article needed a sign. If so, how come did an American go for my jugular for not using US English when I changed traveled to travelled in one US article. I didn't realise traveled was an acceptable alternative. So should I then have turned around and said well there's no notice to say I should use US English. Come one, if the article is about a British place/person/thing then British English should be used. hedpeguyuk 29 June 15:35 {UTC}

My British friends all knew that "Fall" meant the season between Summer and Winter, so changing to "Autumn" is a personal preference, not a spelling change. Raises an interesting question though...if a performer is better known in a country other than his birth country, should spelling be that of the birth country or the country of fame? If Blunt moves to the US, do we change everything to US spelling? 216.95.209.50 17:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

I know Fall means Autumn, it's a word that originated in the British Isles (as with most other "Americanisms"). Autumn is still the title of the season's article. Autumn is more universally known and it's not spelling, as I suggested, but still language. My point still stands with the program/programme as that is still a spelling difference. Also, I'm afriad your question is invalid. Blunt is as well known, if not better known, in the UK than in the US! You couldn't get away from him last year! No, even if he moved to the US, UK spelling should be used. Madonna lives in the UK, but US spelling is (or should be) used in her article. UK spelling for UK topics/people, US for US people/topics - I'm sorry but them's the rules. hedpeguyuk 19:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Further to the above. US album sales 2 million, UK sales 3 million. US population 300 million, UK population just under 60 million. Methinks that's a higher number of sales per head of population in the UK. Your point about place of birth was interesting. Do you mean place of birth or nationality? If someone was born in a certain country, moved to another country at a young age and became a citizen of that country that would confuse things. You would probably use the spelling conventions of the latter. However, Blunt was born in Britain, educated in Britian, served in the British army and still remains a British citizen. hedpeguyuk 19:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

As an American, I love American English, but I concur with the British people on this one. To keep inter-dialect edit wars to a minimum, the general Wikipedia rule is to leave articles in the original dialect in which they were drafted, with the exception that articles attached to a particular place should be drafted in the dialect used there. Blunt is clearly British, so this article should be in British English. --Coolcaesar 19:38, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism

Shouldn't there be a bit more about how much of a cock James Blunt is, and how the vast majority of people with taste cannot bear his "songs"? -- Boothman /tɔːk/ 21:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC).

i argree and would love to see that, but sadly im not to sure that wouldnt just be slander and subsequently removed.--Fabio 02:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
He sure does suck. How many times can you say beautiful? Its sad.

(207.69.139.13 11:28, 8 December 2006 (UTC))

[edit] POV section

I've tagged that section as POV. The current wording regarding the survey is clearly POV and I don't think that the survey is in any way notable. violet/riga (t) 12:54, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Just because it highlights the general opinion that the public have of JB does not make it POV. It's hard not to make it sound like POV, but if you took that section out you would not be telling the whole story about Blunt. And the survey has been featured on BBC's website and also in a fair few national newspapers. If that doesn't make it notable, I don't know what does. -- Boothman /tɔːk/ 13:00, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
You can't see the POV problem with "loathed by the public"? violet/riga (t) 13:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
No, because it's fact, and the evidence is the survey. -- Boothman /tɔːk/ 13:10, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
A survey by a dairy drink manufacturer that shows a singer to be more hated than people like Saddam, Hitler, Bin Laden and other such people really isn't a good source, even if the BBC jump on it. Next you'll be wanting to use The Sun as gospel. Wording it "the scale on which Blunt had been loathed by the public" when he clearly has millions of fans (also members of the public) is a very poor job at trying to be NPOV. violet/riga (t) 13:18, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I think the survey wording talked about what is irritating, rather than hated. In the way that a paper cut is irritating, whereas a bullet in the head is not. I don't have a problem with the survey appearing in the trivia or backlash sections, but the wording describing it should be the wording on the survey otself, no? --5telios 14:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
I would like to bet that more people hate James Blunt than like him. It's only old people that listen to him anyway, the kind that listen to Katie Melua, Norah Jones, Joss Stone etc etc, ie crap. -- Boothman /tɔːk/ 16:25, 2 August 2006 (UTC).
Yeah, as evidenced by their albums going multiplatinum. Are you able to see properly through those blinkers? violet/riga (t) 16:59, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
What can I say? The grey pound obviously has real weight behind it. -- Boothman /tɔːk/ 18:02, 2 August 2006 (UTC).

One thing's certain - the man polarises opinion like no other singer in Britain today - probably more due to what he has been held up to represent in the media than his whiny voice, although that ceratinly is a contributing factor.Tellkel 10:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

True. British class envy would fade to nothing without people like James Blunt to complain about. Hakluyt bean (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Is Blunt Gay?

A friend of mine told me that James Blunt was gay and that the reason he could never be with the girl in the song "You're Beautiful" is because of this. However, he said nothing of this on the episode of Oprah he was on, instead saying the song was just about an encounter he had with his ex-girlfriend... I don't care one way or the other, just if he is gay it should be on the page. If he is not gay, I don't know if this misconception is widespread enough to write about it on the page or not.

So let's see...you hear an unsubstantiated rumour, and then want to include it in an encyclopedia entry? I'm not sure that sexual orientation is relevant here; however, since there are several published articles where women allege that he was their lover, and none that I have seen where men allege sexual relations with Blunt, seems to me that the more correct entry would be that Blunt is allegedly straight. Risker 04:30, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I did NOT say that. I simply said that I heard it and was curious about it. But most other articles specify orientation in some form of indirect manner. Also, whenever there is a widespread rumor, sometimes it is useful to write a repudiation of the myth. My exact words were, "If he is not gay, I don't know if this misconception is widespread enough to write about it on the page or not" which indicates a question whether than a statement. If you've never heard it before, than it probably isn't widespread enough to be included. Don't give me crap about the "content" of this encyclopedia. This encyclopedia is as spotty as a dalmation, whether it is useful or not. If I was going to change anything, I'd delete half of this "encyclopedia," not out of vandalism, but just because half of it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia and much of it is uncited.

As far as I am aware James Blunt is currently in a relationship with Emma Boler, daughter to millionaire Entrepreneur and stakeholder in Manchester City Football Club, Stephen Eckersley Boler (see http://www.purelymancity.com/index.php/finances/finance-features/ for a brief history of Stephen Boler).

Umm...I think you might be referring to his former relationship with CAMILLA Boler, which ended mid-2006. He is now reportedly in a relationship with Petra Nemcova. Risker 18:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Parodies

While I appreciate that the fact a musician's songs have been parodied may parallel the effect of their work on popular culture, this section seems to be getting out of hand. First off, they all relate to two songs - both of which have their own Wikipedia entries. Secondly, many are unattributed, and in some cases don't even name the performers. I propose that the references to parodies be put into the entries for the songs themselves, with a general reference to the fact that these two songs have been parodied in the James Blunt entry. Would anyone object to this? Risker 22:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Good point! Srxcef 22:12, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

"He has now unfortunately been taken away from Planet Earth but hopes to return to us soon with his brand new Album!" Something's wrong! I tried to remove this but I could'nt do it. Look's like somebody's been playing around. Someone please remove it from the article. --212.24.224.18 02:08, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Petra Nemcova

I have removed the edits about Blunt reportedly dating Petra Nemcova. If we listed all his girlfriends over the years, Wikipedia would need a new server. Doesn't seem to be a particularly encyclopedic fact, but if someone can come up with a good reason to include it, I'd be willing to rethink. Risker 03:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I have added a short personal life section, which links how he met Fisher through an ex; his relationship with Boler; and Nemcova. I agree if we added everyone it would be extensive, but keeping it to the key relationships and present escort should suffice/is encyclopedic - plus if we leave out Nemcova, then it will just keep getting added back in by Anon's, so we might as well add it. Having had a similar discussion/issue on other popstar pages, its simply easier to add than keep removing - plus, we wouldn't be very encyclopedic if we didn't include it/when its well referenced. Rgds, - Trident13 10:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
Nice cleanup of the article, and the personal area is well-handled. Only problem is that there is no citation associated with the theory that Boler is the subject of "You're Beautiful"; most sources consider it to be Chassay, including this article based on an extensive interview with Boler [4]. Can you provide a reference? Even a reference that Blunt had had a relationship with Boler prior to recording "You're Beautiful"? Risker 14:47, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
From my talk page: Hmm - one of those "fan" articles that just keeps growing, and then needs a lot of pruning. In retrospect and looking around, I agree - Boler is pretty clear the song is dedicated to her on one occasion, but about Chassay. Suggest you rewrite - Rgds, - Trident13 18:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Risker" Risker 05:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] YouTube Paradoies

I have removed a number of the Paradoies which link to YouTube, simply because they are - irrelevant to the article. OK, so someone has produced another remake on a popular song, do we need to list all of them? Unless the parody-artist has a Bio here at Wiki and/or the parody adds to the article/makes news itself, then according to Wiki guidelines it doesn't need to be here because it doesn't add anything to the article. Rgds, - Trident13 11:04, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Video Suicide?

re: "In the video for "You're Beautiful", he alludes to suicide by jumping into an ocean as the final lyrics are sung.": You mention the videos use symbolism; consider that the "suicide" is more a spiritual death - a leaving behind of things, even sacrificing one self (the body) to plunge, to give one self over to the ocean (another's beauty). Spelling it out takes some of the magic out of it, but the symbolic death is more there than a "real" suicide is. (this comment posted by 69.115.226.11 at 20:53 on 20 October 2006 into the main article and moved here) Risker 23:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that he alludes to suicide in the video. To say it is suicide seems POV. My point of view is, as the comment above suggests, the jump is a spiritual or mental one. I'd compare it to the coming down to earth of the angel in Wim Wenders "Wings of Desire" (Der Himmel Uber Berlin 1987) or the failed attempt to leave the ship of pianist in Guiseppe Tornatore's "The Legend of 1900," (La Leggenda del Pianista sull'Oceano, 1998). Mr. Blunt's jump is, in MPOV, "taking the plunge," and participating in life, NOT ending it. This does not mean it is not a dark video, but not one about suicide in a usual sense of the word. --Timtak 03:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Entire Singing Career History has been edited out

On reviewing this article today, I note that the entire singing career section was removed from the article around 19 December 2006. I am going to revert it to that revision and then re-add any substantial and verified additional edits that have been made since then. Risker 23:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Re-added an internal link correction by Mike Dillon done at 05:30 on 21 Dec 2006
  • Re-added format fix by Angmering done at 18:04 on 2 Jan 2007
  • Re-added flag icon added by 172.142.51.179 at 23:03 on 3 Jan 2007

Risker 00:07, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Re-added edits made by CSCWEM at 08:48 on 19 Dec 2006, to Further reading, External Links, and Miscellaneous links sections. Risker 00:24, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Second Album

There has been a lot of speculation on when Blunt will be recording his second album, and when it will be released. Blunt also has a well-earned reputation for being facetious when speaking to the media, so even a direct quote from him may not be sufficient to source any information about his plans. Until there is something from an independent, reliable source about the timing of the recording and the release of the next album, I propose that we not include any speculation in the article. Risker 16:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Oh God no, not another album, don't push the Needle Dagger sword deeper into my eardrums, another season of his <sarcasm>fantastic hit singles with his not-annoying-at-all voice making me buy 5 of his albums to put in each of my cd players so anytime I feel lonley I can play on the magic of James Cunt Blunt to sing me to sleep while I think to myself "He is so not a pompous prick that can't sing for shit"</sarcasm> --Dominoski 21:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inclusion of quote from Elbow singer

An editor has added a quote from the singer of Elbow to the article. The source is clearly reliable. I've requested a neutral opinion from the folks at Wikipedia_Talk:WikiProject_Music on whether it is a good idea to include critique from other musicians in articles. As well, I have asked for a neutral opinion on whether the quote gives excessive weight to the criticism section of the article. The link is here: Wikiproject Talk Page. Risker 02:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The inclusion of critiques from other musicians is appropriate when they reflect views that are at least moderately widespread (not just one person's perception) or when the criticism itself is significant. In this case, it fits with the other negative perceptions of Blunt presented (inoffensive songs, vast marketing investment, radio station listeners' complaints, being ranked as one of "the UK's most irritating things"). While it is obvious that some of his music is (or was) quite popular, it is equally obvious that his music (or him personally) provokes strong negative reactions in some people, and it is important that the article reflects this balance. The one major change I would recommend for this article is not the criticism section, but "Singing Career," which consists largely of a catalogue of chart performance and Blunt's appearances. The guidline I like to use with current people and events is, if an elementary student 25 years from now is assigned a report on the subject, what information would they want to know? Cmadler 17:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Editjamesguitar.jpg

Image:Editjamesguitar.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 00:34, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Biography?

Okay... If this is a biography, why isn't there anything about his personal life? I think that there should be a section devoted to his personal life, such as charaties, relationships, religion, family, ect.Bryse 20:58, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Médecins sans frontières

Médecins is spelled this way and not Médicins. So if someone could change that, that would be great, thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.187.95 (talk) 14:04, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Done, thanks for catching that. Risker (talk) 14:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tivia

Blunt advertised his sister on ebay, as she needed a flight to Ireland, subsesequently she was bid for and the winner flew her by helicopter to Ireland, they are no married. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.17.23.137 (talk) 14:59, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

If they were the tabloids would have a field day, I suspect. Someone actually bid to fly his sister to Ireland? The world has gone mad... :)--andreasegde (talk) 12:44, 1 February 2008 (UTC)