Jonathan King was one of the good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pedophilia Article Watch, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Pedophilia Article WatchWikipedia:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchTemplate:WikiProject Pedophilia Article WatchPedophilia Article Watch articles
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
Vile Pervert: The Musical was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 16 January 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Jonathan King. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
In most articles where serious criminal activity - for example, sexual assault - is concerned, this is clearly stated in the lead. The Rolf Harris article does that, as do all others I can find for convictions of this nature. Why is it not the case here? 86.160.1.163 (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:LEAD is up to four paragraphs long, it is not simply the opening sentence or paragraph. King was notable in the pop music industry for many years before his convictions, like Glitter and Harris.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 17:22, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure where the "long-standing consensus" has come from, but you might want to take a look at both the Glitter and Harris pages. What makes King exempt? Glitter/Gadd is far better known, and his crimes ar stated in the opening sentence or two. As it should be.
There's no consistency here. It's everything that's wrong with Wikipedia. 86.160.1.163 (talk) 15:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think this could be mentioned in the opening paragraph, but it doesn't need to be in the opening sentence, per my comments on this at User talk:Ianmacm.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 16:49, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. I tried to do this some time ago, but it was immediately reverted. Perhaps you might have a go. 86.160.1.163 (talk) 17:04, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking along the lines of "King's career in the music industry was effectively ended in 2001, when he was convicted of sexually abusing five teenage boys." But it's best to get a consensus to avoid too many reverts.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 18:27, 25 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems OK to all concerned. Good job. 86.160.1.163 (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"hits that he performed and/or produced under different names, including "Johnny Reggae", "Loop di Love", "Sugar, Sugar", "Hooked on a Feeling", "Una Paloma Blanca" and "It Only Takes a Minute";"
Cannot see any connection between most of these and Jonathan King? Bigmund (talk) 16:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"After the "debacle", as Judge Taylor described the 2018 trial, some commentators started to question the verdict of the 2001 trial, including Bob Woffinden in his book The Nicholas Cases, and Daniel Finkelstein in The Times; the Criminal Cases Review Commission announced it was reopening an investigation into it, after fresh evidence emerged during the 2018 prosecution" -
Neither of the sources listed state that the subjects earlier convictions have been reopened? As the sources do not state what is claimed I will remove this once others have had time to see if there are indeed any sources. Also there are no sources for claiming Woffinden or Finkelstein have recently questioned this conviction. Can anyone provide these? Giant-DwarfsTalk 16:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replying to myself - Anyone got thoughts or sources regarding this? Giant-DwarfsTalk 14:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Been 2 weeks now and no other person has supplied any relevant sources. Unless I can find any I will edit this claimGiant-DwarfsTalk 18:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly 4 weeks later and no-one has commented or added any sources so this claim has been removed. If sources are found then obviously it can be added back Giant-DwarfsTalk 21:53, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"between September 1971 and 1972 he produced 10 top 30 singles in the UK" The source is a scan of the subjects own blog, not suitable re wiki rules. The subjects own discology lists only 6 records in the top 30 in that time period. Therefore I will replace the correct figures unless someone can provide a relevant source? Giant-DwarfsTalk 17:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Replying to myself here. The 1 source listed, the subjects own scan on his blog, does not even state the claimed figure of 10 records in the top 30? Giant-DwarfsTalk 17:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article now says six and the supporting reference says 10. Do you have a reference for six?--Egghead06 (talk) 21:50, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Egghead06 Please can you show me where the source actually states the 10 records? I apologise in advance if I missed it, but I simply could not see those details in the source? Giant-DwarfsTalk 18:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the source is a display from a page from Billboard. The article on King and a new record company has the figure in the last paragraph. It doesn’t list six or 10 hits unfortunately.--Egghead06 (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If someone (the subject) videos something they wrote themselves and are the only people in the video. Then they post it only on free video hosting sites (youtube) does that then mean the video can be classed as "film"? Unsure if these self shot videos should be listed in the article as released films? Giant-DwarfsTalk 17:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree to some extent. These are basically deluxe home movies made by King and posted on video hosting websites, we are not talking about Citizen Kane here.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 08:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever they are, they show his desperation to tell his side of his own story and thus have a place so as not to pile on the obvious bias some editors seem to have against King.--Egghead06 (talk) 09:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I see no bias, especially from me? TBH, for a convicted child abuser, the article seems very glowing of the subject? But I was just trying to see what is accepted as classed as a "film" on Wiki? Its not a big point at all, just wanted clarifying Giant-DwarfsTalk 18:10, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Egghead06: Please assume good faith and avoid accusing other editors of bias against King. It is fair and accurate to point out that King's films are essentially personal online videos. The question is whether they are notable in terms of WP:DUE, and they have not received a great deal of media coverage. The use of the word "films" might give the impression that they have had a cinema release on the big screen, and there is no evidence that they have.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 19:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also fair to say, things have moved on. Not every film makes the big screen with the rise of Netflix, YouTube etc. Indeed Wiki’s own definition of "film" has in the lead paragraph, "They are usually shown in theaters, on television, or via streaming platforms". None of these films has a Wiki article in their own right. My view is that they are King’s own attempt to tell his story and show some kind of existing relevance to the show biz world, a view on his first film shared by the Daily Telegraph review [1] --Egghead06 (talk) 20:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
" King was arrested in November that year and bailed on £150,000, £50,000 of which was put up by Simon Cowell" Is this relevant at all to the article? All I can see if some sort of effort to make the subject appear in a better light? Giant-DwarfsTalk 18:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the mention of showbiz mega-star Simon Cowell, or are you also objecting to the inclusion of the arrest and bail figure? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sources for these at all in the article, and they need sources? I will try and find and add any, but any I cant will be removed Giant-DwarfsTalk 21:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first three of his films are referenced in section "After prison".--Egghead06 (talk) 23:38, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you talking about the section "Selected works?" Where we have a list of books like:
(1982) Bible Two: A Novel According to Jonathan King, London: W. H. Allen/Virgin Books.
(1997) The Booker Prize Winner, London: Blake Publishing.
(2009) 65: My Life So Far, London: Revvolution Publishing Ltd.
etc. ?
If so, this is a case of WP:BLUESKY. You don't have to add references to "verify" the bibliography! Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 18:15, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
