Talk:Des Lynam

Clean Up

I have cleaned up the article a little, and updated it the information on Countdown. I have removed some of the links as the page was, and still is too blue. You only need to link something once, such as the BBC.

Gavin Scott 02:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Once a woman?

Under 'Career' it states - "It is believed Des Lynam was once a woman." Huh? I'm no biographer but that seems a bold statement to make, is there a reference? Seems far fetched. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smitnn (talk • contribs) 14:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Can someone?

Crop his picture to make him more central? Thanks!--82.8.226.105 (talk) 14:34, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Reading of "If—"

This is mainly for the IP(s) that consistently revert(s) a removal of the part about Lynam reading a poem during the 98 World Cup. Their message on my Talk page, Everything I removed was trivial., is still very unclear to me. Since the first step before filing a 3RR report is discussion, this will be our opportunity, and any involved editors that pass by this discussion can chime in. Especially CentreLeftRight, who has already reverted this IP once without explanation, which is what the IP is concerned about. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 23:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

And now my stance on the matter: while I do agree that mentioning the reading is trivial, it's also properly sourced with only one source, as Lynam kept the masses glued to their TV sets during the reading and It set the BBC switchboard alight as viewers asked to see it again.. Television viewers request to see memorable things on repeat all the time. I'll agree to its removal if it's not backed by any other source. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 23:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Nice that you finally thought of a reason for undoing my edit. But if you agree that mentioning the reading is trivial, why did you put it back without any explanation? "Trivial" and "encyclopaedic" are mutually incompatible.

Now, the source is from 1998, and it's the BBC reporting on themselves. Also, it's not 1998 any more. And look at the context for this: paraphrasing, we have "Lynam worked for the BBC for 30 years and was known for his witty and down to earth style. In 1998 he read out a poem." It's completely jarring and it's absurd to think that this one thing should alone be highlighted from his BBC career. The specific claim is that he is "remembered" for reading out this poem, and the wording is clearly intended to imply that reading the poem and 30 years of witty down to earth presenting are equally "remembered". The source is from three days after he read the poem out. You consider that a claim that this is remembered 19 years later is thus "properly sourced"? 124.159.170.92 (talk) 00:16, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift response. I can agree to its removal, however, I will point out that I kept reverting because I as well thought your actions were bordering vandalism. If instead the source can be changed, take a look at this Irish Times article that mentions the reading. I will leave it up to the IP to judge whether this source is enough, otherwise, I have no say on it other than it's only briefly mentioned in a paragraph. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:21, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I regard your comment about vandalism as a personal attack. You may correct this by explaining exactly how you could think such a thing, when the policy clearly states that "any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not vandalism". 124.159.170.92 (talk) 00:32, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I apologize. I will retract my statement and give in to your removal. You are right: both the Irish Times article and the BBC source are insufficient for the material's inclusion. You do not need a true reason for my reversions, as I have already changed my mind on the matter. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your apology. To return to the content, then, the Irish Times describes him reading it "as though reading out the teleprinter result of a Hamilton Academicals vs Arbroath match. Quite stunningly awful." That really doesn't support the text that I removed, which would imply that it was, even now, the single most significant broadcast he'd ever made and recalled with fondness. So I'm glad we agree on removing it now. 124.159.170.92 (talk) 00:45, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I've performed the edit and pointed users to this discussion, with a brief summary. -- ferret (talk) 11:36, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Des Lynam. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130523043052/http://www.debretts.com/people/biographies/browse/l/7268/Desmond+Michael.aspx to http://www.debretts.com/people/biographies/browse/l/7268/Desmond+Michael.aspx

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 08:57, 9 September 2017 (UTC)