Talk:Graham Kendrick

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

criticism?[edit]

Some criticize his lyrics as a dumbing-down of traditional Christian song lyrics. [1] Any more info available?

Alternatively, you could say that he was making them more accessible. Try asking someone who does signing for the deaf whether they prefer Kendrick or Wesley. For example, how would you sign "...consubstantial, co-eternal, while unending ages run" for a completely deaf person? (And yes, I know it's probably not Wesley - 'twas the first one that came to mind!)
EdJogg 12:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what way would you prefer to say 'consubstantial' to make it more accessible? the question isn't accessibility, it's leaving out the 'hard bits' and pretending it doesn't matter. 70.81.97.63 (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quentin Letts[edit]

I tried to add some referenced criticism, shown below, but Feline Hymnic seems to think he's beyond reproach.81.130.78.70 (talk) 11:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say he was beyond reproach. Check the edit reasons I gave. Please be careful in what you accuse me of. Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think we may need to refer this to an independent arbiter. Letts' description is pretty nasty, and I'm not convinced that his book is really appropriate as a reliable source, as it is presumably his personal opinions in print. What qualifications does he have for assessing Kendrick's song-writing ability? Is he even a church-goer? WP's rules on BLP articles are pretty strict, and although Lett's work at least meets the requirement of being 'verifiable' (it can be read online) that doesn't mean it should remain here.
Also, Mr 81.130.78.70, if you create an account for yourself you would probably find your opinions on content were given more credit. (The majority of vandalism and 'unhelpful editing' is done by anonymous editors.)
Having said all that, the new section on Popularity is well-balanced (2 for, 2 against!), reads well (much better than the original submission) and properly referenced. Shine, Jesus, Shine is being picked-out for particular praise or criticism. I don't think it's his best song by a long way, and I suspect that it is now rarely sung by the most progressive congregations, but it is very distinctive, very anthemic, and clearly popular. (Personally I prefer Servant King, and Teach me to Dance, both of which have rather more significant lyrics!)
EdJogg (talk) 11:03, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Ed. I appreciate your input! There are two separate edits: one about Kendrick himself, the other about 'Shine'. The one about 'Shine' clearly doesn't belong in this (Kendrick) article, but rather (if at all) in the 'Shine' article. So I have just (re-)deleted that particular one. Letts' polemics are his opinions; do they classify as Wikipedian reliable sources? (In an earlier revert, I had suggested in my comment that our anon-IP editor consistently apply similar edits to all those targets of Letts' polemics that have WP articles. That would help establish whether or not Letts is regarded as a reliable academic source.) I do hope the anon-IP editor gets a proper account, and starts contributing constructively (including with quality criticism where justified) to a range of WP articles. Feline Hymnic (talk) 00:15, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism[edit]

Kendrick features in Quentin Letts' book "50 People Who Buggered Up Britain" where he is described as "the king of happy-clappy banalities"[1].

References

  1. ^ "50 People Who Buggered Up Britain" 2008. Quentin Letts

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Graham Kendrick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Graham Kendrick. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 05:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Church Membership[edit]

Seems unlikely that Graham is a member of both the local church in TW and Ichthus. The Ichthus article says that he *was* a member, which seems more likely. Mdrb55 (talk) 20:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Graham_Kendrick&oldid=1203242199"