Difference between revisions of "Talk:Boy George"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::"''Boy George" isn't really a family friendly character, and we should not promote his lifestyle.'' On that score we should be deleting Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler. Shouldn't the question be 'Is BG of any long-term cultural or historical relevance?' [[User:Pachyderm|Pachyderm]] 06:04, 28 July 2007 (EDT) | ::"''Boy George" isn't really a family friendly character, and we should not promote his lifestyle.'' On that score we should be deleting Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler. Shouldn't the question be 'Is BG of any long-term cultural or historical relevance?' [[User:Pachyderm|Pachyderm]] 06:04, 28 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :::I'm surprised that this article describes his music in such glowing terms. The mention of his androgynous image being a large part of his popularity IMHO, seems to glorify the breakdown of traditional gender roles. [[User:JohnGalt|JohnGalt]] 17:30, 3 December 2007 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 22:30, December 3, 2007
Because it was such a strong part of his image, if this articles stays, there should be some mention made of his permanent makeup and his later public admission of homosexuality. Learn together 18:35, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
- I think this article should be deleted. "Boy George" isn't really a family friendly character, and we should not promote his lifestyle. SSchultz 23:35, 27 July 2007 (EDT)
- "Boy George" isn't really a family friendly character, and we should not promote his lifestyle. On that score we should be deleting Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler. Shouldn't the question be 'Is BG of any long-term cultural or historical relevance?' Pachyderm 06:04, 28 July 2007 (EDT)
- I'm surprised that this article describes his music in such glowing terms. The mention of his androgynous image being a large part of his popularity IMHO, seems to glorify the breakdown of traditional gender roles. JohnGalt 17:30, 3 December 2007 (EST)