User:Keithbob/SexySadieDiffs

The Real "SexySadie" Story: Civil, Neutral Collaborative Editing

The real story is Civil, Neutral, Cooperative editing by Editors vs. Ownership, I Didn't Hear That and POV issues by WillBeback.
BigWeeBoy reduced the weight of the Beatles section as a whole.
Bigweeboy removed the Sexy Sadie text and the pro-TM text on the song Across the Universe, which was beamed into space by NASA[1][2]
SexySadie was never a issue in Bigweeboy's revision but WillBeback made it one, in preparation for ArbCom.

Edits were made slowly, with input from other editors, using Talk Page, Sandbox, consensus. WillBeback chose not to particpate. Furthermore, after the Sandbox version was implemented Keithbob made several edits to clarify criticisms contained in the sources re: Mia Farrow, sexual impropriety allegations. Keithbob also deleted other, positive information, that was not properly sourced. This is called neutral editing. Also, when WillBeback wanted to re-add SexySadie to the article, Littleolive oil, Bigweeboy and Keithbob said OK. Furthermore, when Bigweeboy revised the Sexy Sadie text in his Sandbox version [3] he removed text about the pro-TM Beatles song "Across The Universe".[4]

Old Threads

MMY page Beatles discussion Feb 2007 [5]
MMY page Beatles discussion Feb 2008 [6]
MMY page Beatles discussion with Will Beback April 2009[7]
TM page Sexy Sadie discussion with User:The7thdr July 2009[8]

Recent Threads Discussed below

MMY page Beatles Sandbox revision by Bigweeboy Sept 2009 [9]
MMY page Sexy Sadie discussion with Will Beback Jan 2009 [10]

Highlights in Chronological Order

Sequence of Events

May 2008 "There are some discrepancies in the addition to the Beatles on, Lennon's admission of a mistake. For example, BBC is said to have printed the admission, and of course BBC is not a newspaper... My thought is that it would be very nice to link this to a source . This article and section are highly contentious so this kind of addition should be more clearly sourced for the reader. I do correct/copy edit the material, but still a source a reader can get to would be best.(olive (talk) 03:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC))[11]

July 2009 "I have no problem with the sentence below as it specified by the source that is cited: “John Lennon “fell out” with the Maharishi and wrote the song “Sexie Sadie” about his allegedly materialistic ways.” --Kbob (talk) 01:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[12]

July 2009 Bigweeboy (BWB) also supports text on Sexy Sadie: "Perhaps there are secondary sources that can be used" Bigweeboy (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2009 (UTC) [13]

Sept 26th 2009:Bigweeboy STARTS TALK—[14]"We could either try to reduce and summarize the Beatles section, or we can expand the other sections, or add new material. What do others think? --BwB (talk) 18:42, 26 September 2009

Oct 8th 2009: TALKPAGE: "Since I have had no comments on this, I will start to edit the section to make it shorter. --BwB (talk) 21:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Oct 8 2009 Yes, the section is a bit long. It might be OK to condense, keeping in mind that the media, for better or for worse, always associates The Beatles with Maharishi.-- — Kbob • Talk • 21:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[15]

Oct 28 and 30th TALK PAGE: "I have reworked this section. You can find the proposed version in a sand-box here [18]. I feel it could even be shorted and would appreciate other editors feedback before making the changes to the mail article. Many thanks. --BwB (talk) 21:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I have created a shorter version of this section in the sandbox. Would appreciate some feedback from other editors. --BwB (talk) 19:41, 30 October 2009 (UTC) [16][17]

Nov 4th BWB PUTS IN SANDBOX VERSION—This means summarizing a lot of the content, including Sexy Sadie AND the positive content on the song, Across the Universe being played by NASA.[18]

Nov 4th Bigweeboy TALKPAGE: I have moved the version I created in my sandbox on 28 Oct to the main page. --BwB (talk) 19:50, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[19]

Nov 23rd Keithbob (Kbob) makes these edits:

Keithbob ADD TEXT--Lennon and Harrison departed two weeks later after hearing rumors about the Maharishi.[20]

Keithbob ADD TEXT--that the Maharishi had made sexual advances towards Mia Farrow and a few other women.[21][22]

Keithbob ADD TEXT--According to the New York times, after Lennon’s death, in 1980, Harrison and McCartney reconsidered the accusations. McCartney said that the rumors of sexual impropriety were raised by Alexis Mardas who "had agendas of his own, and may have fabricated (or at least exaggerated) the story" [23]

Keithbob TAG UNSOURCED TEXT--Later, Lennon classified the incident as "an error in judgment". ^{[citation needed]}[24]

Keithbob ADD TEXT AND REF--According to a New York Times article the influence of the Maharishi and going to Rishikesh to meditate, weaned The Beatles from LSD and inspired them to write many new songs which later were recorded on the White Album.New York Times, "Meditation on the Man Who Saved the Beatles"[25]

Keithbob Nov 23rd DELETE IRRELEVANT TEXT--During part of the concert McCartney was accompanied on stage by Ringo Starr for only the second time since the breakup of The Beatles many years earlier.[26]

Keithbob Jan 17, 2010 DELETE UNSOURCED TEXT-- Later, Lennon classified the incident as "an error in judgment".^{[citation needed]}[27]

Jan 2010 WillBeback: Ownership, Misrepresentation, POV and Harrasment

WillBeback makes Misrepresents, Accuses and Badgers Editors [28]

Can anyone explain what the process was for this rewrite? Will Beback talk 09:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC

Jan 2010 Sorry you missed this Will. Please see the following comments here on the talk page from late Oct and early Nov 2009…….So there was an opportunity for others to participate. -BwB (talk) 12:44, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

“this has the appearance of being another case of ignoring outside input.” Will Beback talk 20:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

If the changes are not acceptable reopen the discussion but blaming is hardly constructive.(olive (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2010 (UTC))

“Now that those uninvolved editors have moved on the material is deleted without comment, and you seem to be objecting to its restoration. Is that a correct summary?” Will Beback talk 00:37, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I like the rewrite, but I'm happy though to go with a consensus on it. Will, I'd suggest you stop mischaracterizing this as something it isn't and we move ahead with a discussion on the content. This is not good, not good at all. I'm not very comfortable with what's going on here.(olive (talk) 01:33, 15 January 2010 (UTC))

“The fact that some editors have agreed to the deletion is not a good reflection on them. Unless Bwb or another editor can offer good explanations for the necessity of removing relevant, sourced, discussed information then it should be restored, regardless of what was or wasn't said in October.” Will Beback talk 01:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

“If you want to edit the current version, please go ahead, but no need to make all this fuss. Thanks.” --BwB (talk) 12:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm still interested in your reasoning. Did you think that the song was an unnecessary detail in the biography? Were you unaware of the previous discussions? Will Beback talk 13:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I have given my rational for the edits and the process I followed. Others had ample time to participate at the time. I am done with discussing this further and am happy to move forward in a collaborative manner on this section. --BwB (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Not to be be contrary, but you have not provided your rationale for removing "Sexy Sadie" from the article. I assume there is none. Will Beback talk 20:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I still haven't seen any explanation from Bwb for his deletions. Will Beback talk 04:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, I admit to not paying any attention to the matter at the time, so it's partly my fault. I'm still getting up to speed on this topic and I don't catch all the nuances. Will Beback talk 12:58, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I will agree to having BWB add back in a short sentence on "Sexie Sadie" if there is agreement among editors. I do think the addition is superfluous.(olive (talk) 15:41, 15 January 2010 (UTC))

If you go back to the archives you will see that I also participated in the discussion and made edits to his rewrite. So there is no ground for any complaints. Now in the present does someone have some text they'd like to suggest for the article?-- — Kbob • Talk • 18:23, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I have no objection to adding the Sexy Sadie text if there is consensus to do so. …to me the previous text on the Beatles seemed excessive, and so I tried to summarize and shorten the text. It can be expanded again if editors want to do so and I am happy to be part of that effort. --BwB (talk) 12:30, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Before I add it back I just want to make sure that no one engaged in this discussion still has any objections that haven't been addressed. I wouldn't want to come back to this article in 2011 and find that it's been removed again without explanation. Anyone who thinks it's an unimportant detail should be ready to defend seemingly less important details now in the article. Will Beback talk 02:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC) [29]

So I take it there are no objections to restoring "Sexy Sadie". Will Beback talk 21:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Continuation of above Thread Yields POV Ideas by KalaBethere and WillBeback

Will to flesh out the Sexie Sadie reference it might be helpful to include some quotes from one of the Maharishi's former personal secretary, Conny Larsson, who in his book Behind the Mask of a Clown wrote "Maharishi’s sex life, for example, was extensive, to say the least. That a man in his position had a sex life I regarded as quite incongruous. As I had been very close to him I was often in charge of the key to his room, which he asked me on various occasions to hand over to one of the young ladies."--Kala Bethere (talk) 14:16, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Rather than adding a section on "Sexie Sadie", wouldn't it make more sense to add a section called "Controversies" (or some similar title) and that could then include neutral discussion of the Beatles Rishikesh experience, the differing stories and other relevant POV's? That would also give space for brief mention of other Maharishi controversies.--Kala Bethere (talk) 18:33, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I hadn't considered adding a section on the song, just restoring the deleted sentences, which I've now done. If there are other significant events in the subject's life, controversies or otherwise, I think it'd be best to include in them in chronological order rather than segregating them in a section of their own.

The year or so that the Beatles spent as disciples of MMY is a complicated period involving famous people, some well-reported events, and many conflicting accounts. To give the period full treatment in the biographies of any one of the participants would probably cause WP:WEIGHT problems. The answer may be a standalone article, something like "The Beatles and the Maharishi". Will Beback talk 20:04, 26 January 2010 (UTC)