Jump to content

Talk:Judith Durham

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Copyvio?

This large, unwikified contribution: [1] sure looks to be a copyvio, perhaps of liner notes on an album. But I can't prove it, so I can't yank it. Wasted Time R 03:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does, doesn't it (a bit..). I'll try and get to this in a few weeks. Judith Durham certainly deserves an entry in Wiki. This on the basis that she has been a significant figure in Australian musical history, but also because (musically inclined wikipedians might have more to say on this) it's my impression that she had (still has) one of the finest (popular) female singing voices of the modern age, comparable with Karen Carpenter.Tban 15:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DVD

The main text claims Diamond Night was released in 2004 but the listing says 2003! Whichis it? Any one know? 86.144.78.59 (talk) 20:20, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photographs

I have uploaded a photograph of Judith Durham. The caption I have supplied is "Judith Durham, age 24, during her time of fame with The Seekers"; please do NOT delete the image without reading the permission. Richard David Ramsey 23:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

That earlier photograph was made in 1968. I have now uploaded a 2001 photograph. Permission to publish both in Wikipedia only has been granted by Graham Simpson, Judith Durham's agent and biographer. Please do NOT delete the images without reading the permission, which is in the images' talk pages. I recommend that, in the article, the 1968 photo appear first and the 2001 second. Richard David Ramsey 00:53, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Judith's name

Some user (I haven't checked who it was but someone with as sophisticated a sense of humour as Fast Forward character Kelvin Cunnington) has altered Judith's actual surname, Cock, to something unmentionable in the first line of her bio.

Out of respect to Judith, and to prevent recurrences of this type of vandalism, is it possible to restrict alteration to certain sections of the entry such as this one? Pete3194 (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Remarriage?

The following statement which appeared in the "Personal life" section has been culled out pending confirmation, the only source ostensibly mentioning it being the "Judith Durham" Wikipedia article:

Durham remarried in 2008, to long-time fan Thomas W. Merrigan of Austin, Texas. [1]

Rammer (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a hoax. The article on Judith Durham has been a frequent target of such vandalism. Rammer (talk) 02:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "DURHAM Judith Mavis remarries". New York City, NY: TIME Magazine. 2007-11-17. {{cite magazine}}: Cite magazine requires |magazine= (help)

Clarity Question

In 1990 Durham, Edgeworth, and their tour manager Peter Summers were involved in a car accident on the Calder Freeway. The driver of the other car died at the scene, and Durham sustained a fractured wrist and leg. The response from her fans made Durham consider getting back together with the other Seekers.

What did the fans do or not do either way to make Durham consider? What did the fans think she had actually done in the car crash. Did she cause the car crash? This section needs to be re-written to remove ambiguity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.32.67 (talk) 00:55, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Judith`s Future

In the future, as of 2009, judith is hoping to continue to write and perform songs. Since the seekers, she has released many albums solo. There is also a possibility that she may tour around australlia.The recent and planned album that is said to be in progress hold on to your dream. Her website says that "this album is currently in production" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.242.211.146 (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Middle of career?

The info snippets cover her time with the Seekers, and short solo career for a few years afterwards. There is then a huge gap until the 1990s, when some more things occurred. Was she publicly active in the interim? If not, we should say so, and talk about her late mini-comeback. Or have we simply not found news items from before the internet/Wikipedia? In which case we should look a bit harder. Even better if we can then edit the whole to tell the story in a less bitty way. 112.118.166.225 (talk) 13:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Judith Durham recovering after a stroke

There are a number of reports that Judith had a stroke back in May. It seems she is recovering and the outlook is positive. Worth someone adding? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.92.32.221 (talk) 11:50, 10 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It was a brain hemorrhage. She reported at a concert in Auckland tonight that she had recovered, and that her singing ability had never been affected.¬¬¬¬

Morningtown Ride

What is the purpose of the speculation about Morningtown Ride? The song was written by Malvina Reynolds, there is no doubt about that. I don't believe space should be wasted on reporting what is clearly a false rumour¬¬¬¬

Current chart position

I have removed the current chart position of the new CD in accordance with WP:NOTNEWS which implies that any short-lived or temporary facts should not be included in articles. If anyone wants to disagree with this then discuss here with links to any relevant WP guidelines or policies. Afterwriting (talk) 17:01, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop citing WP:NOTNEWS with your own interpretation of what it means. It does not explicitly state "do not add new information". You are assuming those peaks (for Judith Durham and Beccy Cole) are "temporary". Wikipedia does not run on the assumption that people have to wait and stew on things before any information can be added; you are reverting based on your assumption that the No. 44 peak of Climb Ev'ry Mountain is "short-lived". It is very unlikely either of those albums will move up the charts next week. It's not impossible but given those artists' records, it's very unlikely. That's not my reasoning for adding it, but there's no guarantee an album can ever have truly "left" the chart (it might fall out of the top 100 but could just as easily be back the week after), so when is the right time by your logic? Ss112 17:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Of course WP:NOTNEWS does not say "do not add new information". But it clearly implies that any information which may only be factual for a short while is NOT added to articles. And as for assumptions you are making a whole lot of them. I, however, have not made any. I have already made it clear when the right time is ~ which is when we know with reasonable certainty that it has peaked. Until then it is entirely inappropriate to include it. How much clearer do you need things to be?! Afterwriting (talk) 17:17, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"When we know with reasonable certainty" is the most vague response to a question asking for a definite answer I think I've read on Wikipedia. You are making assumptions, but of course, by your logic, you don't think that you are. For one, you are assuming this chart position is short-lived whereas I and Tobyjamesaus aren't because we recognise peaks change and potentially being "outdated" is not an issue because a huge portion of Wikipedia is outdated and all you can do is update it when it happens. This issue needs broader discussion because I don't see this going anywhere with you reverting any new information added to the page because you think it's short-lived, but I don't think it will get any and that's why editors frequently resort to saying "discuss it on the talk page". I don't see you taking issue with the thousands of editors who update chart positions on every other music artist's page everyday. Ss112 17:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I am taking issue with this article because it is one I am interested in. I am not expected to go looking for the same problem all over Wikipedia. Quite frankly your comments are ludicrous. It is not an "assumption" on my part to consider that the current chart position is only temporary information. It is common sense. This is not an appropriate way to include chart positions. An appropriate way is to actually say something, such as that the album "entered the ARIA charts at No. 40" or "as of 18 April 2015 the album was No. 40 on the ARIA charts". These are appropriate ways to include information which is or may only be temporary. Giving the impression that a current position is its peak position is not appropriate. Afterwriting (talk) 17:39, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have repeatedly stated that there is never a time when you can say that a number is definitely a song or album's peak position (except if it has topped the chart) and you still don't appear to get it. And yes, you clearly haven't gone looking because if you had, you would know that listing the number a music release has debuted at and if it moves up the next week then updating it happens on every music artist's article. Discographies with wikitables listing just the number it peaked at are probably, by your logic, not appropriate and "ludicrous" too. That view is ridiculous and if this attracted more discussion, I'm sure most editors would disagree with you. I'm out. Ss112 17:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The only person not "getting" things is yourself. And the aggressive way in which you "discuss" things is very tiresome. Afterwriting (talk) 17:59, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why did she leave the Seekers in 1968 ?

At the height of their success ? Article needs to discuss this. Rcbutcher (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Voice

Soprano, yes? No? Maybe? 71.233.90.196 (talk) 03:06, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Soprano" is a term best applied to operatically trained voices, and I wouldn't put Judith Durham in that basket. Doug butler (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Judith Durham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Judith Durham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:30, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have a source for the category that she was a republican? PatGallacher (talk) 18:33, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In "In the News"?

A line at the top says "A news item involving Judith Durham was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 6 August". But it didn't. That's still being debated at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates. HiLo48 (talk) 21:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've been told elsewhere the article WAS in ITN for about ten minutes, then removed. I have removed the template. HiLo48 (talk) 03:55, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Judy Jacques

A contemporary of Durham, and also from Melbourne, Jacques had a similar voice and repertoire, and a decent, though not as illustrious, performing and recording career. Does anyone have a sufficient reference for an article or footnote somewhere? She appeared on IMT and Bandstand more than once. Doug butler (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Judith_Durham&oldid=1257710198"