Talk:James Blunt

Blount Family

Does anybody know if James Bl(o)unt is descendant of the branch of the Blount Family who was of service to Henry VIII.? Glamourqueen (talk) 18:29, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

his own account of his life suggests that he & his mother have visited this very article in the past, tweaking his birthdate & whatnot. while I recommend the book for its humorous & self-deprecating tone, I don't think it's a reliable source of such genealogical data; is "who's who" still a thing?

duncanrmi (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Article review

It has been a while since this article has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed the following:

• There are lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs and many of the awards.
• Unreliable sources are used in the article, such as Hello Magazine. These should be replaced with better sources or the text it supports removed.
• The 2017-2019 section is underdeveloped. This should have more text added to this section or have it merged with another section.

Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 19:59, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Very little point in disturbing the folks at WP:GAR, if we know the article will fall at the first fence. Surely it's far better rallying editors to try to improve what we have (or moreover have not). - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

James Blunt

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Delisted. TompaDompa (talk) 05:49, 22 January 2026 (UTC)

There are lots of uncited statements, including entire paragraphs and many of the awards. Unreliable sources are used in the article, such as Hello Magazine. These should be replaced with better sources or the text it supports removed. The 2017-2019 section is underdeveloped. This should have more text added to this section or merged with another section. Z1720 (talk) 03:59, 26 November 2025 (UTC)

• Delist No edits to the article since this was posted. Concerns remain. Z1720 (talk) 16:16, 14 December 2025 (UTC)]

Please be more specific about your concerns re sourcing; you identified only one source that doesn't meet requirements. I am working on this, but it will be slow progress due to real life and other wiki-commitments. I have been collecting additional information on a page in my userspace that will allow updating in a more organized fashion. This shouldn't be a rush, especially at this time of year. Risker (talk) 02:29, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Please also be specific about what issues you have with Hello! Magazine being used as a source. It is comparable to People magazine, which is used as a reliable source in multiple BLPs, including several FAs. Risker (talk) 03:22, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

• @Risker: Per WP:GAR, "Reassessments should not be closed as delist while editors are making good-faith improvements to the article." This GAR will not be closed while you or any other editor are making improvements (even if they might take a while). As for Hello Magazine, the source was posted on WP:RS/N in 2019 with the conclusion that it was not a reliable source (discussion linked here. If you think the consensus has changed for this source, I think it would be appropriate to open a new discussion. Other unreliable sources I see in the article are Daily Express, International Business Times and Discogs. Please let me know if you would like me to add "citation needed" templates to the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:50, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

It's almost as if my complaint from seven years ago bore merit. mftp dan ^oops 21:02, 18 December 2025 (UTC)

For clarity as to whether this could be closed or should remain open: @Z1720, Risker, and MFTP Dan: what's the status on this? TompaDompa (talk) 17:15, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

• @Risker: Are you interested in working on this? Of course, there is no obligation to do so. Z1720 (talk) 17:26, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I will continue to work on it now that the holiday break is over. It will take a while to do this. CN templates would be helpful, and perhaps more specifics on what you feel is missing. Risker (talk) 07:15, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

• @Risker: I have added citation needed template to the article. I have no opinion as to whether the "2017–2019: The Afterlove and Walk Away" needs more text or if it should be merged with another section: it depends on if the sources have sufficient information about that period in his life/career. Z1720 (talk) 13:58, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

• I've invested quite a few hours searching for reliable sources for the CN-tagged information. Most of those are from the pre-2017 period. Unfortunately, the information has either been removed from access or is now behind paywalls the cost of which I simply cannot justify, and because of the paywalls it would be difficult to illustrate compliance. (I will note that I can find *some* but not all of the info, but I don't think the sources would meet GA quality expectations.) With this in mind, I think the reassessment should be closed. Risker (talk) 22:14, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

• Yes, I see this; thanks for the notice. The sources for the period you mention are sparse and consist mainly of interviews. Having read a lot of them, it's difficult to take seriously the information that comes from many of those interviews. Will see what I can pull together, but it will take time, as stuff is spread all over the place. Risker (talk) 07:09, 26 November 2025 (UTC)