Talk:Marianne Faithfull

Missing any info about Metallica collaboration

At least the sentence "She provided backing vocals on the Metallica song 'The Memory Remains' which released in 1997" should be somewhere on the page. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Memory_Remains 209.203.197.27 (talk) 10:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

One of the leading female artists of the British Invasion in the United States?

"One of the leading female artists of the British Invasion in the United States" is in the lead and not the body, unsourced and IMO misleading. This was recently edited from a slightly less problematic version which did not imply that she was huge in the US at that time. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 17:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

References

Citation 10 is behind a paywall. On the website of pseudo fascist newspaper 45.141.132.104 (talk) 00:53, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

There's a website I use that cleans pop-ups and therefore skips paywalls, though I'm not sure per Wikipedia's policy on WP:COPYVIO that I can share it. By the way, this is WP:NOTFORUM, especially not for other topics. This is not the place to cope and seethe over the perceived political orientation of a source that was only there to say what school she went to. And yes, I would say the same if someone raged over a banal Guardian reference as a "globalist soyboy cuck newspaper". Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Mars bar - interesting omission

In the whole article, there is only one mention of "Mars", as an external link in which "she specifically denies the notorious Mars Bar incident". However, the article never says what this incident was, which would confuse the uninitiated.

We all know the story was false but it's mentioned in all obituaries. It came alongside the drug bust and contributed to her loss of reputation, which she commented on for over half a century afterwards. See this 2004 source that has Mars in the title even, such is the notoriety: [1] "Marianne Faithfull's 40-year career has been dogged by tales of sex, drugs and 'that bloody Mars bar'." To completely omit this story is like writing about Freddie Starr and not including the hamster.

In short, tabloid sources are junk, but tabloid stories have real-life consequences that are reported by reliable sources for decades to come. Unknown Temptation (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

MySpace

All the MySpace sources have been removed as "junk". But WP:ELP says it may be used:

• As a reliable source:  Sometimes. The official page of a subject may be used as a self-published, primary source, but only if it can be authenticated as belonging to the subject. (See Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published sources.)

Is there some doubt that the 2007 MySpace account "belonged" to Faithful? Thanks Martinevans123 (talk) 13:33, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Where to put biopic news?

A biopic is in the works. I think it should be mentioned somewhere in the article. Where would it fit?

References

★Trekker (talk) 10:19, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Infobox image.

For a very long time, the image of Marianne Faithfull in the infobox has been a more recent image (File:Marianne Faithfull, Women's World Awards 2009 b.jpg), as opposed to an older image from the 1960s. I am in favour of retaining the more recent image, as Faithfull has had an extensive, decades-long career, well past her years as a 1960s pop star. She's gone on to appear in multiple films as an older adult and had many critically acclaimed albums since the 1960s. Not every image of a successful woman has to be of when they were considered "young and pretty". I personally find that disrespectful and seems to indicate that her greatest value was when she was most physically "beautiful". The more recent image that had been in the infobox for quite some time should be preserved there in my opinion. It's my opinion that most infoboxes should contain the most recent images of the subjects unless they are mostly only known from a specific time period. Faithfull's body of work extends through decades. ExRat (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I'm personally in favor of using the older image. The image from 1966 was when her career was probably at it's peak, to use an image from an artists most notable period is not something exclusive to women. 2009 was not (as far as I know) a year of particular importance to Faithfull.★Trekker (talk) 00:15, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I would agree if a person's career only lasted or was notable for that period, but Faithfull's career was literally decades long. It seems somewhat nonsensical to me to use a nearly 60-year-old image for someone who had a notable career that lasted until they were 78. ExRat (talk) 02:18, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I disagree. The peak of someones career is still their peak, Faithfull's most mainstream and well known era was during the 60s. Sean Connery also uses an image from the 1960s because that was when he had his most iconic role. In my opinion an image from the 1960s should be used. But a color photo and one where her face is more towards the camera would be preferable, so the 2009 image does have that to it's advantage. In my opinion both images have strenghts and drawbacks. We should wait or request more input from other editors.★Trekker (talk) 14:07, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Agree that more input from other editors is needed. My opinion could possibly swayed if the older image was a better candidate, as I don't feel it's a very good picture in general. ExRat (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

I completely concur with ★Trekker. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 21:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)