Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Death of Jimi Hendrix/archive1: Difference between revisions

Death of Jimi Hendrix (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Death of Jimi Hendrix/archive1

Nominator(s): GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this because I believe the article is well-written, well-researched and comprehensive. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 05:53, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk)

• The lead doesn't feel right to me, but I'll skip that.
  • Its improved now, but can you tell me something more specific about what seems to be missing? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:53, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Lead is fine now. - Dank (push to talk) 04:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• You're switching between past perfect and past tense; generally, use past tense in a narrative.
  • Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:53, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "By around 2 p.m. he had sat": I'm not sure of the meaning. "he was sitting", maybe? If not, then probably just "He sat ..."
• I've made some changes that I think will help. I'm going to stop there, because I'm not confident that I know what this article is supposed to sound like ... understandably, it dwells on what would have been tedious details on any other day, so it's hard for a copyeditor to know what to strike and what to keep. In general, try to eliminate words that don't add meaning. Best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 04:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the comments, I'll keep them in mind as I edit. The past perfect thing has been "forced" on me by so many other editors, I don't even fight them anymore. Maybe I'll get away with it now. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Several paragraphs of past perfect, on the theory that it all happens before his death, isn't precisely wrong, but narrative writing generally isn't done that way these days. - Dank (push to talk) 04:17, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Right on, I think its maybe an WP:ENGVAR issue for some, as I have been editing so many UK subjects lately, maybe not. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 04:23, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • It's more common in BritEng, and sometimes my calls on BritEng are completely wrong, but I think even in BritEng we're generally avoiding several paragraphs all in the past perfect at FAC. - Dank (push to talk) 00:18, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Continuing. "In the days leading up to his death, Hendrix was fatigued and suffering from poor health" is repeated word for word 3 paragraphs later. Sometimes in a long article I see things repeated verbatim, but not that close together.
  • Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "he was infrequently examined by doctors.": Not sure what that means.
  • It means he "rarely saw a doctor", which I suspected someone would accuse of being grammatically incorrect. Afterall, I could walk into a hospital and see a doctor or two, but that would not mean I was examined medically. Is there something incorrect about "infrequently examined by doctors"? Would "rarely examined by doctors" be an improvement? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Go with "rarely saw a doctor", it's more idiomatic. - Dank (push to talk) 00:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• "it was determined": who determined? A doctor?
  • Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 04:38, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks much for your helpful comments and edits, as well as your support. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Happy to help. - Dank (push to talk) 00:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral. Sarastro has convinced me that I'm in over my head here; I'm not familiar enough with articles like this one to do a good job with the prose. Sorry. - Dank (push to talk) 15:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I think a background section would be ideal given that you suddenly introduce the details.--Tomcat (7) 12:13, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you suggesting I document the details of his final several days, instead of just his final day? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 13:48, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, and perhaps any significant triggers that contributed to his death (drugs, etc). Just a random note that asphyxia is linked twice in the lead. Good work at first glance. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 16:40, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks much for the suggestion and for the encouragement! I've now added some background details to help establish the context of his death. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from a brief glance

• Add pics of Hendrix.
  • Done. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Lead and infobox makes doesn't name what city he died in.
  • Its unclear if he died at the Samarkand Hotel, Notting Hill or at St Mary Abbot's Hospital, Kensington, London, so I've added to the lead that he was pronounced dead at St Mary Abbot's. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Infobox: you should flesh out the caption, location and date like Death of John Lennon.
  • The infobox used at "DOJL" is for a civilian attack, so I'm not sure how I could use that infobox here. Perhaps there is a better alternative that you could suggest. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm wondering—should Background have a paragraph or two summarising his life and status just before his death? Basically, who he was. That he was major musician, internationally renowned for his new style of guitar-playing etc?
  • Done. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Can Final hours and Inconsistencies be subsectioned? They look imposing and monotonous. You can also add pics.
  • I've now subsectioned "Final hours" and moved some material around from "Inconsistencies" so as to improve brevity and flow. I think this resolves your above concern. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Can Inquiry and Allegations be merged? One-paragraph sections look stubby.
  • Done. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:14, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure I'll be revisiting. Best of luck with the FAC.—indopug (talk) 05:47, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Indopug. I appreciate your comments and hope you can find the time to revisit. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:37, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by FunkMonk (talk) 02:15, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• There is perhaps a freedom of panorama[1] issue with the following image: [2]
  • Removed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• This fair use image needs a caption that states its importanc:[3]
  • Done. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• The free Hendrix image[4] seems a bit weird, and I can't access the source page for some reason.
  • Removed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• The infobox image has no problems. FunkMonk (talk) 02:28, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for taking the time to review the images. I believe I have now addressed your above concerns. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Evanh2008

Looks like a good article, and I should be supporting shortly.

Lead section:

• "In the days leading up to his death, Hendrix was fatigued" - I'm pretty sure this, and the next sentence, should be in the past perfect. Others may disagree, and this is probably nothing more than a stylistic decision on my part.

• I agree. Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Finding no evidence" - I would use the past perfect for this sentence too. The rest of the lead is fine.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Background:

• "suffering from poor health" ---> "in poor health", for brevity.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "another woman, Kristen Nefer and was" ---> "another woman, Kristen Nefer, and was" - Comma.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "'Devon get off my back'" - Does Brown include a comma after "Devon"? If not, I would add one, per MOS:QUOTE.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "the show along with three others were" ---> "the show, along with three others, was"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "her boss, actor George Lazenby and" ---> "her boss, actor George Lazenby, and"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "record producer Alan Douglas discussing" ---> "record producer Alan Douglas, discussing"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Hendrix friend, Sharon Lawrence" ---> "Hendrix's friend Sharon Lawrence"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Final hours:

• "According to Dannemann, by 3 p.m. they left" ---> "According to Dannemann, by 3 p.m. they had left" - If "by [time]" terminology is used, the past perfect is called for.

• I agree. Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "and then Kennington Market" ---> "and then to Kennington Market" - Parallel structure.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "to a Chelsea antiques market where Hendrix purchased more clothing" ---> "to a Chelsea antiques market, where Hendrix purchased more clothing" - Comma.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Later, Dannemann and Hendrix were invited by Phillip Harvey, the son of an English lord, to tea; they accepted." ---> "Later, Phillip Harvey, the son of an English lord, invited Dannemann and Hendrix to tea; they accepted." - Active voice. I don't mind, but others will. You might also try to find out what title Harvey's father held, as "Lord" is a form of address and not a formal office.

• Fixed. The sources say that Harvey was the son of an English lord and he was concerned because of his father's "position", which would seem formal. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Most likely Phillip's father was a Baron. I'm looking into it right now and will get back to you if I find anything. Otherwise it would probably be best to change "lord" to "nobleman", as "lord" is very rarely used outside formal terms of address. (As per this article, it is "a generic term to denote members of the peerage".) Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 10:06, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Prior to their arrival at Harvey's they" ---> "Prior to their arrival at Harvey's, they"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The sentence on Harvey's affidavit is a little confusing. If he remained silent until 1995, what is he doing swearing an affidavit in '94? Or have I read that wrong?

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "In his statement he claims" ---> "In his statement, he claims"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The word "also" in "to have also been mildly" doesn't seem necessary.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Sometime after returning to the apartment Hendrix" ---> "Sometime after returning to the apartment, Hendrix"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Post-mortem examination and burial

• "Dannemann later claimed that Hendrix, unaware of the brand's high potency, took nine of her prescribed Vesparax sleeping pills. Intended to be taken in one-half tablet increments, nine tablets of the powerful German sedative amounted to 18 times the recommended dosage." needs to be changed to "Dannemann later claimed that Hendrix, unaware of the brand's high potency, took nine of her prescribed Vesparax sleeping pills, which were intended to be taken in one-half tablet increments. Nine tablets of the powerful German sedative amounted to 18 times the recommended dosage." A participle has been confused somewhere along the line here.

• Nice catch! Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Also, change "claimed" to "stated", per Wikipedia:Words to avoid.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistencies:

• "We went to sleep about 7 a.m.." I think an extra full stop has crept in there. Ending it with one full stop is just fine, even if that full stop is also part of an abbreviation.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "When I woke up at eleven his face" ---> "When I woke up at eleven, his face" - MOS:QUOTE

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scotland Yard inquiry and allegations of murder:

• "re-open" ---> "reopen"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "The investigation eventually proved inconclusive when in 1993, Attorney General" ---> "The investigation eventually proved inconclusive in 1993, when Attorney General"

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The paragraph on Wright's book needs some work. The claim that Jeffery held insurance on Hendrix isn't mentioned until its rebuttal, so it should probably be introduced prior to that. I'm not sure the bit on Trixie Sullivan's statement belongs here, as it doesn't appear to be directly connected to accusations of wrongdoing against Jeffery. Maybe find a place for it up in the Final hours section?

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Final lyrics:

• "Dannemann phoned Eric Burdon frantically complaining that she could not wake Hendrix up." ---> "Dannemann phoned Eric Burdon, frantically complaining that she could not wake Hendrix." - Comma. Also, don't end a sentence with a preposition; "wake Hendrix" works well enough.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Why isn't "a woman, she claimed his name" italicised?

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very small issues. Once these are resolved, I'll give it another look and will most likely be ready to support. Great job so far! Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 08:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to provide your helpful review. I believe I've now resolved your above concerns. Please let me know if you catch anything else. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy response! I'll have some further input shortly. Looks good. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:21, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, notwithstanding one minor issue mentioned above. Feel free to archive resolved comments to talk or elsewhere if it begins to clutter the page. Evanh2008 ^{(talk|contribs)} 09:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: I notice that most comments have been on prose so far. While there are problems with the prose, I think that this article has more troublesome issues. The lead is not great, but the whole article seems to be missing important information and, perhaps more importantly, explanation of and commentary on events. I know bits and pieces about this topic, but I'm far from an expert; even so, there seem to be several important missing pieces. I've commented on the lead and left some other general comments. This oppose is not set in stone, and I would like to see this featured, but I think a lot of work could be needed. Sarastro1 (talk) 15:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to comment. As far as "the whole article seems to be missing important information", can you please be more specific. I own 25+ books on Hendrix, so I could find any important information, but I have no idea what you think is currently missing. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

• I'm not a fan of a one-sentence opening paragraph in the lead.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "In the days leading up to his death, Hendrix had been fatigued and in poor health, due in part to severe exhaustion caused by overworking, a chronic lack of sleep and a persistent case of influenza. Insecurities about his personal relationships and frustration with the music industry had contributed to a fragile mental state.": This is all quite clunky, and could be simplified and streamlined. E.g. "In the days leading up to [before] his death…". We have "fatigued … due to exhaustion" (!) and several parts where the relationship between events is unclear. Was the severe exhaustion caused by overworking AND a chronic lack of sleep (third repetition of tiredness here, as well) or was the fatigue and poor health caused by exhaustion AND a chronic lack of sleep.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Though the details of his final hours and death are disputed, Hendrix spent much of his last day with Monika Dannemann, socializing with friends.": The comma after Danneman is odd here, but I'd suggest that "socializing with friends" is unnecessary.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "He awoke late on the morning of September 17 at her flat in the Samarkand Hotel, 22 Lansdowne Crescent, Notting Hill and was pronounced dead at St Mary Abbot's Hospital, Kensington, approximately 24 hours later.": I'm really struggling to see what is going on here. On my first reading, I though this meant that he awoke dead at her flat. Then I read it that he spent the whole of his final day at the flat. But this wasn't the case and I doubt that the most significant thing he did on his last day was wake up. This is an odd way to lead into the events.

• The article said: "socializing with friends", which is what he did that last day. Should I be more specific? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "Intended to be taken in one-half tablet": "One" seems redundant.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• "unaware of the brand's high potency, took nine of her prescribed Vesparax sleeping pills. Intended to be taken in one-half tablet increments, nine whole tabs of the powerful German sedative amounted to 18 times the recommended dosage." For the lead, this is really over-emphasising that he took too many of a powerful sleeping pill. Way too much detail. And this rather presumes the cause of death, which I understand is under some dispute.

• The cause of his death was absolutely the sleeping tabs, its the circumstances surrounding the event that are debated, not that he overdosed on Vesparax. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The lead is rather sparse on other details. Most readers who come here will, I suspect, be looking for confirmation or refutation of conspiracy theories. Yet the lead does not really go into any of these details other than "Though the details of his final hours and death are disputed". The only events given in the lead are that he woke up and that he died. The lead is not summarising the article as no mention is given to the inconsistencies or the inquiries. And that the coroner (why "the post-mortem inquisitor"? The post is called the coroner) recorded an open verdict is left out in favour of "concluded that Hendrix accidentally overdosed" which even the main body does not say. Sarastro1 (talk) 15:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, but above you just said the lead had "Way too much detail" regarding the cause of death. Also, FTR, per your above comment: "which even the main body does not say", the article states: "He found no evidence of violence or suicide and concluded that Hendrix accidentally overdosed", and it did so before your review. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:54, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General points: I've only dipped into parts of the remainder, but here are some initial thoughts and suggestions.

• The prose is lumpy and quite poor in parts. Some examples only (not an exhaustive list):
  • "During the week preceding his death, he was stressed by two pending lawsuits": Why "preceding"? "Stressed" is not encyclopaedic.
    • Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he was infrequently examined by doctors": What? They rarely examined him? Why make this point? Or does this mean "occasionally" examined by doctors?
    • Fixed. The point was there to explicate that he was not taking proper care of himself. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Routinely surrounded by dozens of hangers-on and lacking close, trusting relationships, his insecurities about the future and frustration with the music industry contributed to a fragile mental state.": Why is "hangers-on" (which is also unencyclopedic) linked? I doubt that this was an issue solely in the lead-up to his death, which the other factors presumably were.
    • Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Why do we have a whole paragraph on his press interview in the background?

• Trimmed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• And the background seems long generally. Why all the detail about Nefer?

• Excess detail trimmed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The background sections never says who Danneman is, and gives none of her background with Hendrix.

• Fixed. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The background really should have more about Hendrix' drug-use as this would seem to be more relevant to his death than some of the other details here. On a more general level, the whole background sections seems to be tacked on, and quite random in its content.

• The section summarises his last week, and all the verifiable details about his drug use during this period are included. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The whole "last day" seems rushed and flits from one thing to another without suggesting a coherent narrative or offering explanations. While I'm far from an expert on Hendrix, I know that the version presented here is slightly one-sided. Devon Wilson played a rather larger part in events than is suggested here. She was not exactly an ex, and she was in London only because he was. And the version of the party seems to be mainly Danneman's version.
  • If "Devon Wilson played a rather larger part in events than is suggested here", then the sources I own do not support this. Again, I've read 25+ books in preparation for this FAC, and none of them implicate Devon as being partly responsible, as you seem to believe. Per: "the version of the party seems to be mainly Danneman's version", 1) that's nto accurate, the account given in the article is based much more on Harvey's statement then Dannemann's. Also, only two people ever gave statements regarding the party, Harvey and Dannemann. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Just to clarify, I did not mean that she was responsible, just that she played a larger part than indicated. But I'm happy to defer to the 25+ sources. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The state of his relationships with the various women at this point could perhaps be made clearer.

• Hendrix had lots of girlfriends, he was promiscuous, but few, if any of these girlfriends were in a relationship with Hendrix in the traditional sense. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Lots of things are hinted at, but not explained. Danneman's inconsistencies are pointed out but there is no further comment. There is a section about murder allegations, but it never states who is alleged to have murdered him. The implication is Danneman, but it is never explicitly said, and as I understand it, there are a few other candidates for a potential murderer.

• Per: "it never states who is alleged to have murdered him", Wright only claimed that Hendrix's manager, Mike Jeffery, admitted to him that he had Hendrix killed, Wright does not say who killed him. Anyway, the story is absolute baseless rubbish and deserves no more attention then this IMO. How could I comment further on Dannemann's inconsistencies and not run afoul of WP:OR? No judgement has been made and this case will never be fully solved. Only two people know for certain what happened that night, and both of them are now long dead. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Although I'm not sure how well it tallies with other sources, there is quite a lot on Hendrix's death here. Maybe useful? Sarastro1 (talk) 15:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: OK, I've struck the oppose and I'm going to pull out of this one. I'm never a huge fan of the "I've read 25+ books argument", and I can only address what you present here, not what else you have read. I can't provide enough evidence either way for what should or should not be included; certainly not from reliable sources. I'm not convinced that this article is comprehensive enough, but I admittedly do not know enough about the source material to oppose (or support). I suspect that this article will disappoint any readers who come this way, though, even if what they may be looking for confirmation or refutation of "is absolute baseless rubbish and deserves no more attention then this IMO" (I hope the sources support your opinion!). I maintain that things are not fully explained though: the last day in the main body is surprisingly sparse on explanations, and we still have no suspect for the murder allegations, which looks odd. And the prose needs a polish. But I am not opposing, and won't be revisiting. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]