Talk:John Mayer

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the John Mayer article.
Article policies
Archives: 1, 2, 3
Featured article star John Mayer is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 16, 2007.
Archive
Archives
1, 2, 3



[edit] This sentence needs work (or should be removed)

"Central to Mayer's proposal is a mid-ranged approach to being ecologically aware: neither completely fearful nor completely ambivalent of global warming."

By what standard is his proposal "mid-ranged," and who says this? Why are his ideas somewhat fearful and ambivalent, and what is meant by those words in this context? This sentence is rather subjective and needs work. I really don't know what the intention of the author was so I can't fix it myself. My 2 cents are to just remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwr12 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

If there is no opposition, I will be removing the sentence then.Dwr12 (talk) 17:59, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
From what I am reading above, you have two misunderstandings (1) That a wikipedia editor interpreted his ideas and came up with this sentence and (2) that the sentence is saying that his ideas are fearful and ambivalent. Actually, this sentence is a summary of his blog entry that says exactly this (I suggest you go read it, I added an archived link for you and anyone one else's convenience) and the sentence is saying that his idea is NOT fearful NOR ambivalent (in contrast with other global warning campaigns). This is purely John's opinion of his own campaign, and I think the article makes it pretty clear that this is coming from his blog, this is his own personal project and his personal ideas. If this were an ecological article, then his ideas would have to be substantiated, but this sentence is merely reporting one of his personal projects he's been working on the past year. All is all, I reinstated the sentence, but improved teh reffing to make the source of the sentence a little clearer.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 13:13, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
My "interpretation" of the fearful/ambivalent thing is due to a literal reading of the sentence. If his ideas are not completely fearful/ambivalent, it does not mean that they are absolutely not fearful/ambivalent. It is along the lines of this: if it is "not completely" cloudy today, there still can be some clouds in the sky. As for the statement being a self-evaluation by Mayer, I strongly feel that this is not made clear. What is clear is that the "proposal" is something out of his blog, but there is no indication that the evaluation of the proposal was done by Mayer himself in his blog. I have edited the sentence to introduce more attribution to Mayer for these opinions of the proposal: "Mayer regards his proposal as a mid-ranged approach to being ecologically aware: neither fearful nor ambivalent about global warming."Dwr12 (talk) 02:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
That rephrasing works fine to me :)--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Humor

Would someone like to add a humor section in this article regarding John Mayer's eccentric personality? I think this is appropriate to add since it is very much a part of his life. John Lennon has a section dedicated to his strange humor because it was such a notable part of his persona. It could perhaps talk about "John Mayer has a TV show" where John dressed up as a giant rat and interviewed unsuspecting fans, deliberately mispronouncing his name to anger the fans. Or his Esquire articles where he reviews his own album, giving it a B- and calling it somewhat 'creepy.' I would write the section myself but I don't really know that much about him. Perhaps you could also incorporate the "Portable John Inc." comment above. Discostu24000 (talk) 14:52, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

John dressed up as a bear, not a rat. Anyway, some mention of his columns and stand-up is mentioned in the article, so there is evidence of his humor. Any statements of his eccentricy is an opinion, and thus would have to be substantiated by ample third party sources. I'm not opposed as long as it is done briefly (since this is not a large part of his fame) and substantiated correctly.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:53, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Perez Hilton controversy

I just reverted a whole section in this article devoted to today's Perez Hilton "kissing" controversy. I feel this is a significant event, thus notable, and so should be included in the article. However, according to WP:WEIGHT, the amount of space devoted to a topic is also of importance. Considering this is a one-day blip in the course of his career, two sentences are more than sufficient, especially considering his year-long relationship with Jessica Simpson (much more significant) is only seven sentences and his whole early career is only one section. This little incident hardly merits its own section. Also, since this is a featured article major re-writes and contentious additions should be discussed here first.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 18:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree. And I restored your version when another user reverted your reversion; I think it is in keeping with WP:BLP policy. Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 02:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)