User talk:Kohoutek1138/Archive 2

We the People (band)

Hi! "We The People (band)" was my first article ever. And, I'm glad it didn't get deleted. Inline references have changed the look of the article. Thanks for the review to make it go live.

Elitropia (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the article is more informative with your contribution, now. And, I'll sure consider your suggestions for the next article(s).

Elitropia (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, do you think We The People (band) article should be listed in We the People (disambiguation)? I'm not sure since the band name has the capital T. If so, I could edit immediately. Thanks.

Elitropia (talk) 17:56, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved the article. Thank you for the information.

Elitropia (talk) 14:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's All Over Now Baby Blue GA pass

I'd like to congratulate you on the article passing GA. You put in an amazing amount of work into it and it payed off. Well done. Kitchen roll (talk) 16:11, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even think the editor reviewing it put up a tag on the wikipedia:Good article nominations page - it was done in about 10 minutes! Are you sure in letting me have some of he credit for getting it to GA? Thanks if you are. Kitchen roll (talk) 15:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Kohoutek :) Kitchen roll (talk) 19:31, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well done for getting the allusive chart info. on the Them single in Germany. Kitchen roll (talk) 13:20, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, love the story! Great that you've cleared that one up. It's really frustrating when you know something to be true on wiki but can't reference it because there's no reliable sources, so I'm glad there was something in the end. I'll see you around Kitchen roll (talk) 19:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chimes of Freedom

I just nominated Chimes of Freedom for GAN. We'll have to see how long it takes to move up the queue, since it is starting at #64. I think Tambourine Man started arounf #40, and Baby Blue was something like #52. Rlendog (talk) 15:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for History of The Byrds

On January 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article History of The Byrds, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on this.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See, see also, etc.

Whoops ... I see I am late in a reply to you. Italics on "see" (and the like). I can't recall which style book this comes from, but am sure that in whichever one has guided me I've learned to use italics for "see", "see also", "but see", and the like. Rules apart, it works for me on a logical plane, as it is different in use than normal words, and the italics alert you to that fact.

Let me know if you want me to go searching for the genesis. But a quick google search yields this, this, this and this -- not all of them the best sources, just the fastest-found. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pleasure, as always. Sorry I haven't had more time to focus on helping. Have been otherwise occupied, as you can perhaps tell from my talk page.--Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Bob Dylan Newsletter

Greetings! This message has been sent courtesy of WikiProject Bob Dylan, which you are a member of. Our project now has two Featured Articles: Bob Dylan and Like a Rolling Stone, and three Good Articles: Mr. Tambourine Man, It's All Over Now, Baby Blue and Madhouse on Castle Street. Suggestions are now being canvassed for the next article to work on, as part of the WP Dylan collaboration team. Please voice your opinion here. Regards, --Richhoncho (talk) 22:59, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: The Notorious Byrds Brothers

Hi Kohoutek. First off, thanks for your great effort on The Byrds articles. I can't say I'm a fan of the group beyond their big hits, but I appreciate the good work.

Coming to my recent edits on the above article, I think you were wrong to revert my changes to the above article wholesale. There was a lot of overlinking; our readers know what the words 'band', 'drummer', 'novelization', 'film', 'songwriter' and 'short story' mean. You had also linked 'country music' twice in the lead. By linking everything in sight, you merely dilute the occurence of high-value links in the article. Further, that album chronology in the article pertains only to studio albums, as NBB is a studio album. The '1968 in music' link is completely unnecessary as well, and barely article text should contain bare external links per MoS (like that Snopes link, which is there in the EL anyway). Also, on Wikipedia, if you name a single as "Goin' Back"/"Change Is Now", I've seen that it implies that it is a double A-side single.

As for the album-ratings template, I'm afraid I don't see a consensus in those links you posted. In particular, the whole point of removing the reviews from the infobox was because we figured that rating-less reviews cannot easily be summarised in terms like 'favourable', 'unfavourable' and 'mixed'. That would mean that reviewers such as The New York Times shouldn't be included, but far less important sites like Sputnikmusic would have a place on the template. That makes no sense, does it? In all the articles where I removed the reviews from the infobox, I made sure that the critical reception was covered in the prose.

Please elaborate what the "factual inaccuracies & poor syntax" I added to the article are. Thanks—indopug (talk) 11:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: review consensus. I've been a part of the review template discussion every part of the way, and the actual consensus is that the review template is optional. What's more important than linking to specific reviews is determining critical consensus, if possible. For example, quoting general reception as described in a book or article on the specific album. WesleyDodds (talk) 06:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fundamental misunderstanding you have is one that a lot of editors often overlook, so don't worry that you aren't clear on it. Basically, citing material in the article prose is your main objective. The review template is a tool meant, like all templates and infoboxes, to enhance the prose. It doesn't replace it. Thus if something is cited in the template yet nonexistent in the article body, it's more important you work it into the article body than to spend your efforts filing out the template. Note the language in Wikipedia:Albums#Reception (emphasis added by me to certain key phrases): "The bulk of the information should be in prose format, though the text may be supplemented with the [Album ratings] template, as a summary of professional reviews in table form. The template is not to be a substitute for a section in paragraph form, since a review can not be accurately boiled down to a simple rating out of five stars, or a phrase like "unfavorable".

Re: the consensus on the use of the reviews template: keep in mind the discussion went through a number of article sections. The links you provided are essentially the beginning and end of the discussion; you missed out on everything in-between. The first link you provided was an attempt to track consensus on November 30; discussion continued for another month in various forms. Also, looking at a tally of who supported what doesn't provide a full picture of how consensus is developed; that sort of number-crunching is why voting is discouraged on Wikipedia.

You ask "why was DASHBot was tasked with relocation of the professional reviews by the Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums community if this wasn't the consensus that was reached?" You misunderstand the purpose of what DASHBot is doing. DASHBot is moving the reviews to the article body so we don't lose citations that might be useful before the review field in the album infobox is depreciated, thus rendering them invisible. Once the reviews are moved, it's up to the editors then to decide exactly what to do with those references. Also, if an article (say, a stub) does not have a critical reception section, the bot automatically creates one. However, when the bot does that, it will add an expansion tag that indicates the the section needs prose. That's because a template/infobox is not a substitute for prose, merely a supplement; that's why they're optional. Yeah, we might not use every review cited if the template is removed, but utilizing every review that used to be in the album infobox is not what you should be striving for. The simple reason for that is that it's realistically impossible to cite every album review ever published in notable publications unless the album is obscure; you're going to have to leave some out anyway. The true goal is to cover critical consensus on a album as related by secondary sources. Citing reviews can help do that, but it's not an end in of itself to achieveing that goal. For an example of how to cover critical consensus without citing a bunch of album reviews, see Be Here Now (album), where a book, a documentary, and a feature article in a magazine paint the picture of the album's developing critical reception in a way simply quoting reviews could never do, because those sorts of sources take the sort of macro view you should be seeking out.

At the end of the day, it comes down to this: if you find the template useful, go ahead and use it. If not, take it out. As I see it in The Notorious Byrd Brothers, it's redundant to the prose since it only holds scores to a handful of reviews that are duplicated in the article text. My advice is that it's useless in this instance, but that's what I think on the matter. Judge for yourself. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:36, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The review template as quick-summary: It doesn't always work as one, due to the fact that you can only include so many reviews, they don't include the finder details of the review prose, and because reviews that don't use rating systems aren't utilized. Ratings can also be arbitrary; Rolling Stone is notorious for this.

As for the mandate of DASHbot, that was a looooong discussion that I really can't give you quick links to except to recommend you read Archive 34 if you're relaly curious. Basically our descision to use a bot grew out of the question of what exactly to do once we removed reviews from the album infobox (since consensus was overwhelming to remove them, even if that point we hadn't agreed on what the next step would be), and was modified progressively as we ascertained what a bot could do. WesleyDodds (talk) 15:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Folk rock

Go for it! If there's anything I disagree with, I'll let you know - but hopefully not! Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:34, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello K - Great work thus far on folk rock. Still an issue, I think regarding the last line of the NYC paragraph, Unterberger notwithstanding. Aside from my edit summary point that Baez is a far better example of urban traditionalist/protest music than Collins - a) Collins is from Denver, CO and won fame at Newport RI in 1959; she played Greenwich Village coffee houses, but everyone else did as well. Baez actually lived in NYC following her appearance at Newport, 1959; b) of the people cited in the sentence as "many" later becoming involved in folk rock - maybe only Ochs in addition to Dylan. Paxton and PP&M never went beyond pop folk, which they were as surely as the KT was - and regarded as such by the actual urban traditionalists like Irwin Silber of Sing Out magazine and others. Silber put the Weavers squarely in the commercializer group as well, and their internal history was troubled by commercial vs. traditional disagreements, which is part of why Seeger left them in 1957. All of this is sourceable from Cantwell, Cohen, and others. Probably not necessary to go into in a section of the article on background. As much as I like and have quoted Unterberger, there are problems with the unsourced generalizations that he (and Weissman) make at places. regards, Sensei48 (talk) 14:05, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Never Before (album)

On March 21, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Never Before (album), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 09:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kohoutek1138. You have new messages at I.M.S.'s talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Categorization

Redundant category Live at the Fillmore – February 1969 is in Category:Live at Fillmore, San Francisco albums, which is itself a subcategory of Category:Live albums. Please respond on my talk if you have more comments or questions. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Twenty Thousand Roads

I'm now reading it. It's quite good and very factual. At first I was worried that it was going to become another one of those bigoraphies where the author attempts to make himself a character. Luckily (from what I've gathered so far), it has turned out to be well-researched and interesting. I never knew that Parsons' father was so well known—he witnessed the attacks on Pearl Harbor, shot down countless enemy aircraft, was awarded an Air Medal, and became so feared by the Japanese that "more than once Tokyo Rose mentioned Coon Dog by his nickname ... She named the targets that Coon Dog hit and added, 'But now you had better watch yourself. We know who you are and we're going to get you.'" (p. 9). - I.M.S. (talk) 02:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Hello, Kohoutek1138. You have new messages at I.M.S.'s talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Your GA nomination of The Notorious Byrd Brothers

The article The Notorious Byrd Brothers you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:The Notorious Byrd Brothers for things which need to be addressed. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 17:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Folk rock PLUS!

Thank you for putting so much work into the Folk rock article. Often too many of us get used to searching for specific words or adjectives (in this case, genres, that we do not notice how much is done to clarify those things ahead of us. I am also writing, hoping to recruit you to help editing the Rory Gallagher article. Amazingly, he has been almost totally bypassed, whether by Rolling Stone's Greatest Guitarists of All Time, as well as record promotion in North America, throughout his life and (to some degree), now. When I found the article, it was crammed with urban myths, trivia. Would you be willing to "rescue" this article with me? It still leaves cleaning up-- but please leave the quotes there that can be integrated into the article. I noticed that you, too, are a Wikifairy, too! And that of many other userboxes on your uaerpage, we have much more in common, too. HoW about it?! Feedback on where to begin first is greatly appreciated.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 20:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

--Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)== YES! ==[reply]

Sure! Anytime you have time, it's fine with me. Problem with being a Wikifairy (esp. one with ADD like me) is that it IS so easy to be sidetracked fixing one thing or another, so I admire your focus. I always end up with a half-dozen articles I edit at once. Unlike most Europeans, Americans often don't know Rory Gallagher's work and enormous influence (particularly on other famous musicians) in part b/c he had terrible fear of flying, so his tours to the Americas were not frequent, and he wasn't interested in commercial gain, so he fought the record companies who then didn't promote his music- Gallagher refused to put out a single! Only albums! Also, of course, he died in 1995.. we have editors who were barely born then..

I'm psyched that you'd take on this project not knowing Gallagher's music. I get turned on to the greatest music and knowledge of how the whole musical puzzle fits by doing this work, funny you mentioned that! Regarding photos, anytime you are looking for some, feel free to browse the list on my userpage. I think I've uploaded about 400 photos of musicians to Wikimedia Commons, which I've placed on the en.Wikipedia, pt.Wikipedia, and sp.Wikipedia mostly, and would be happy to explain photo stuff. I help with requests too. (I just got so fed up with no photos that it became a personal crusade, almost.) My main editing projects have been articles regarding:Cat Stevens, Derek Trucks, some work groups (Mick Taylor and The Rolling Stones), Eric Clapton, etc., but the Gallagher article is special. (If you haven't noticed, I favour blues rock, and specialise in slide guitarists and Rory Gallagher won contests for his abilities over Clapton while Clapton was with Blind Faith. Just let me know if you have any questions. If your email is activated here, mine is too, it would be easiest for you to email me when you're ready and talk about how you'd like to approach the article.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 01:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, works for me! I am also kind of tied up with some stuff, so the same goes for me re: Gallagher's article. Of slide players, I have found a lot of inspiration from Lowell George (whom I knew very briefly when I was a very underaged teen), Mick Taylor, Derek Trucks, and many others in addition to the ones you already mentioned. Jeff Beck and Eric Clapton both have had really shining moments- as you mentioned with Cream, for example, and of course, there's all those lovely Willie Dixon songs that were covered by everyone from Jimmy Page to Brian Jones of The Rolling Stones. I'm coming to believe that too often, musicians seem to have a "shelf life" of creativity, insofar as songwriting and inspiration, unfortunately. Ah, well. Anyway, glad to hear you will help. I left a whole lot of usable links for Rory Gallagher on his talk page. Talk to you later!--Leahtwosaints (talk) 20:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Let's Live for Today (song)

On May 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Let's Live for Today (song), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Side project collaboration?

Hi Kohoutek1138 and Rlendog, how are you? I was wondering whether, as a side project to whatever individual projects we each happen to be working on, either or both of you would be interested in collaborating with me to try bringing some of your GA Dylan/Byrds articles up to FA. It could be a really relaxed collaboration that we tinker away at in between working on our other stuff. I'm probably going to be working on The Basement Tapes as my next project with Mick gold and I.M.S., but in any lulls in that I'd be really happy to have another side project to give my attention to. I think Mr. Tambourine Man would be the most obvious of your Dylan/Byrds GAs with potential to go to FA: it's got lots of info in it and is already well-referenced, and with just a little more combing through it, it might not be so hard to bring it up to FA. After that, It's All Over Now, Baby Blue may have some potential as well. I'm not sure whether there is enough to be said about Chimes of Freedom or My Back Pages (which I believe you are currently working on for GA) to bring them up to FA, but we could discuss that later. About what I could contribute to the collaboration, I admit I don't know so much about the Byrds, but I know a fair amount about Dylan, and have a certain number of books on him in my personal library. More than collecting and organizing information, however, I feel my strength is in having a critical eye for consistency and for the overall picture, as well a willingness to trudge away at the (to some) possibly tedious tasks of making the refs, punctuation, etc. all pretty and consistent. Anyway, let me know if you're interested, thanks! Moisejp (talk) 11:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Moisejp! OK, here are some initial thoughts on your proposal...my immediate reaction is to say yes, let's collaborate—in a really relaxed manner—on getting an article up to FA status (and I agree that "Mr. Tambourine Man" would be a logical choice). However, I do have some reservations about FAs generally... Firstly, from what I've been able to discern, the difference between a GA and an FA is a lot of jumping through formatting hoops and other pedantic dotting of i's and crossing of t's. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of informative, well referenced content being added to articles, which is what Wikipedia is all about IMO. It just seems to me that the energy expended on bringing a GA up to FA could be better utilized in getting a Start-Class article up to GA.

My second reservation is that eventually an FA will appear on the front page of Wikipedia and when it does, the article will have to endure a 24 hour shit-storm of ill-informed, badly referenced, non-NPOV edits and outright vandalism, which serves to essentially tear the article to pieces. I've watched this happen to other music related FAs time and time again, with the Wikipedians responsible for getting said article up to FA standard having to undertake a round-the-clock vigil of reverting destructive and disruptive edits.

I'm sorry if this all sounds extremely negative, and I admit that these misgivings of mine may simply stem from a lack of understanding and experience on my part, but to a neophyte like me, getting an article to FA standard seems like a whole lot of work for not a lot of gain. I know that you've been involved in a few FAs yourself Moisejp, so I'd be very interested in your response to my comments. I repeat that I am definitely interested in collaborating to get "Mr. Tambourine Man" up to FA status; I just hope that you can respond with some positive aspects of the FA process that I'm perhaps overlooking. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 13:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to collaborate to get these up to FA, although I share some of Kohoutek1138's reservations about the time spent making sure all the proper types of dashes are used could be better spent improving start class articles to GA. I also have to say up front that work and family obligations have been sapping my spare time lately, leaving much less time available for Wikipedia, and that situation will probably last a while. Still, I am fine with spending some of that time making the formatting and content improvements to get some of these to FA. I am not as concerned as Kohoutek1138 about the damage that occurs when articles are on the main page - the key is not to nomniate them for the main page, and if someone does, just be ready to revert all the edits back to the prior day after noting the few positive contributions to be added back. Rlendog (talk) 00:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kohoutek1138 and Riendog, thank you for your replies. Riendog, like you, recent family commitments have given me a lot less time for Wikipedia, but I'm still on here when I can be, and I'm looking forward to collaborating with both of you. I'll tell you, I enjoy spending time trying to make an article's formatting and punctuation as perfect and consistent as possible (if I'm working towards a specific goal like an FA) and I'd be happy to take on the lion's share of that side of things. Kohoutek1138, your point about the difference between a GA and an FA being not a big addition of content but more the preciseness of the formatting is from my point of view a good thing—I mean by good thing, that the FA seems all the more attainable (and thus motivating) because the content is already more or less there, I just have to worry about cleaning it all up and making it nice and pretty, which I have confidence in myself at being able to do. But of course we will undoubtedly have to make some content changes, and although I'll try to be active in contributing to them, I'll need both of you to bounce ideas off of, and to get input about what we do or don't want to say in the article (especially since I know so little about the Byrds). So we're going to start with "Mr. Tambourine Man" then? OK, maybe this weekend I will have time to start looking at it—but, as we've said, there's no real hurry—I'm just excited to have another article to work on towards FA. I guess I'll be talking to you again soon on the "Tambourine Man" talk page and edit summaries. Cheers! Moisejp (talk) 15:51, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I take your point about "Mr. Tambourine Man" being almost there in terms of content, and I'm encouraged by Rlendog's suggestion of not nominating the article for the main page. I wasn't aware that this was possible - I just assumed that all FAs automatically ended up on the main page. Of course, this just goes to show my lack of experience with FAs, so I'm willing to follow both of you for guidance on this to a large extent. Moisejp, if you're happy to get stuck in with sorting out stuff like punctuation and correctly formatting dashes, then that's fine by me. Again, your prior experience with Dylan-related FAs makes you the ideal candidate for this job.

As for content, I'm certainly willing to bounce ideas and suggestions for improving the text around. However, I should warn you that this article is a tricky one because while it’s Dylan's song and his version is very famous, The Byrds' rendition is arguably more famous and was basically responsible for creating folk rock as we know it today, as well as initiating the mid-1960s folk rock boom—so it's a pretty influential song, to say the least. I know that during the article's GA review (see here), Rlendog, myself and Philcha struggled to cover all of the bases and impart all of the relevant info regarding Dylan and The Byrds' versions in a concise and easy to understand way. I think we did a pretty good job, although it could still be improved upon to some degree, but this is definitely a complex article. Myself, I'm pretty knowledgable about Dylan and I consider myself an expert on The Byrds, with a number of books about the band in my own personal library. So between us, we shouldn't have too much trouble with this article. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 19:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd forgotten how long your GA Review lasted—re-reading it now, yes, it seems like it was quite a challenge to find the right balance of all the different elements. Let's hope our eventual FA reviewers don't have a completely different idea about how the article should be organized! Just now I read the article a little more thoroughly than I had in the past, and was quite impressed. The information seems thorough, well organized and flows well. There were a few little things in the content I noticed that I thought it might be good to change, but I guess it'd be more appropriate to bring them up on the article's talk page rather than here. For the formatting I also noticed a few things, and will go ahead and clean them up, and then comb through the article line by line to see if there are any punctuation, etc. inconsistencies. I'll also check all the online references to make sure there are no dead links or sources that may have passed GA but might not pass FA. About the referencing, when we brought both Like a Rolling Stone and The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan to FA, we used the Harvard referencing style, which I like because it's very very "clean"-looking. I was slightly considering changing the referencing "Mr. Tambourine Man" to Harvard style as well, but then again it might not be worth the bother, since the article has so many references and your referencing seems solid and consistent in the style you have used. Still, I am a little bit mulling the possibility, and might give in to the temptation if I get bored or run out of other things to do—but, if you are partial to the current style or have another good reason you'd prefer I didn't, just let me know. Thanks! Moisejp (talk) 14:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think that the article's prose does a pretty good job of getting the info across but re-reading it recently, I did notice a few bits of text which could do with tightening up. Some parts of it just sound a bit disjointed and don't flow as well as other parts I felt. I'll try to have a go at copy editing it and improving things where I can over the coming days. As for the reference style, it's up to you. I think they're fine but you're the one who knows what FA reviewers like and don't like, so I'll leave it up to you. I agree that discussions of individual points about the article should, from now on, probably be raised on the article's talk page. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't consider myself a particular expert on FA and have only been through a few of them (I think Riendog has more experience than me). I just normally try to use common sense and learn what I'm supposed to do as I go along. Anyways, for the reference thing, I'm quite leaning towards not changing it, as it looks fine as it is. It was a more a case of own personal preference for Harvard rather than any supposed preference by FAC reviewers. Anyway, in the coming days I'll get started on the article and probably also leave a note on the Talk page about the few prose points that I'm thinking maybe should be changed. Talk again soon! Moisejp (talk) 03:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MY HOWLIN' WOLF PHOTOSITE

originally just placed in Rogthorpes reply box... moments ago

Hello,

I am glad to hear who and why someone is being so destructive to what I have placed and while willing to be as neutral as possible as regards your recent comments:

... previous and according to your own words not read...

am not quite sure how to clearly and simply get a message to a wiki editor, but Kahoutek, you're very very wrong about many things. Please be so kind as to make sure both of you see this...whoever gets this and if it's posted in wrong place it's a personal a response to just transfer to an email if you wish and tell me how to reach you in a a simple way if need be but I wont keep putting this time into this venue at this level so please let's see if what i say makes at least SOME sense to you okay?

unless somehow self-righteous and envious maybe "nothing personal against your fine editing jurisprudence" but clearly there is SOME kind of arbitrary and capricious style of your abuse of power as follows.....

RE Mike Wilhelm: and you may ask him

Mike and I and his wife Ana (Ann) did Mean Ol' Frisco here in Marin Co. at first then in S.F. in 1985; for Patrick Mathe' of France who if you look into his background you will recognize .. maybe... New Rose/Last Call and etc.etc.

He (Mike) chose me for harmonica over, for example and surprisingly at the time though glad to have been told, Norton Buffalo... because not only did I write 3 of the songs on that album, in ways he liked, but I had also (besides from Howlin' Wolf, who I knew so MUCH better and in fact -at all - than any of those external link owners you allow... this is next subject.. for now Mike Wilhelm) I had also learned harp from Sonny Terry and he guitar from Brownie McGhee.... We had a very special musical rapport probably best he ever found so I understand... and I played harp (blues/rock/folk harmonica on 7 of the 11 tracks) in the way he liked best

I was asked to take the cover shot and others by co-producer and him because of my photographic abilities and background and close (photographic as well as musical and family style connection to Howlin' Wolf and Arthur Crudup, whom I played drums with whenever he was out west.

On Mean Ol Frisco, Cippolina (with one lung left) came out of hospital to do it, played on 2 tracks, former quicksilver drummer Greg Elmore was on all, bass man Bobby Vega on most... and clarinetist sax player Richie Olsen from orig. Charlatans.

This stuff is not secret but so artitrary how you publish, it would seem to one who was THERE... uh well that would be me... for example. My photos of John (Cippolina) and others are on the inside 10 of 12.

I was NOT an unknown musician even then. but did not ordinarily waste time with the derivative imitators when I was blessed enough to be making songs and being tight friends with Howlin' Wolf, Arthur "Big Boy" Crudup, Brownie McGhee/Sonny Terry, Mance Lipcomb, K.C. Douglass, and 5 or 6 other blues legends from the time I was a teenager, seeing them socially when possible and corresponding with most, otherwise.

I drove Mike and Ana Marie Rios his "co-producer" and partner, as well as most equipment to every (many) sessions in two studios. Tres Virgo in Sausalito (who's coked-out engineer lost two Tracks! so we left them) and the now-famous Hyde Street Studios.

I am mentioned on that album 12 times... few others got more than 2 mentions. And you omit my name in places that in essense harm truth and possible future sales of it for him and Last Call in doing so... Mike would not argue this I was NOT unknown in the white blues/rock circles too but the details of that can wait this typing is most unpleasantly painful to my basal joints... but plenty enough of references as to my music scene participation.

Within 2 years that Mean Ol' Frisco album was selling at collectors shops here USED for $40, and being at many to sell off my records to pay for a friends surgery, I three times heard customers buying it say they wanted it as much for the cover photo as the songs. What can I say? There are not many "clean-shaven" looks of Wilhelm and some liked it....But of course you don't have to say handsome, was trying to see who the hell was deleting FACTUAL stuff so added that.

And get a clue to your own self-righteous judgmental assumptions PLEASE... There is nothing "shameless" in my efforts. I would, as a trained therapist however, including Winnicott and Fairbairn UK via Guntrip and even Laing (object relations theorists) training (not to mention. yes, the "other Fairbairn" too, of "Get Tough" fame, though trained for many years via Col Rex Applegate not Fairbairn (as am not THAT old to have met either Fairbairne, wink) but that is neither here nor there, right? though some RM50 mates in UK did help me to collect (a matter of conversation sticking to facts of course, and all legal. juts helps to have some realize am not an easy and long distance mark for bootleggers) this was regards to two small-time professional / intentional thieves marketing my photos on amazon and on websites for their profits and who upon being questioned telling me to f.off (first when confronted in an actually rather kind way) so I supppose they got to find out I'd met some good UK mates in Moscow as from from all country' elite recondo forces cross-trained their sharing "secrets" with Spetznas etc. after Glasnost was in effect .. well shucks that was back in the day and I digress)

so the point is.. I know healthy shame and I know and have as counselor helped many to dredge out, view and overcome the other kind of shame (that Bradshaw calls The Shame That Binds, a k a self-hatred in some form) that most have, hold, hide and deny and then mis-treat others behind such, as I may be inspired to consider and refer to when getting such unquestioningly close-minded comments, as just found here.. toward me... well ahead of any fair hearing and as if such comments had truth and only truth... so my friends, if you have a conscience and deeper wisdom at least you may wish to look within... I hope you can, and nothing said is to disparage your various contributions but you really ought to think again about mine.

Also. Mike and I fact fact fact and documented re the Harmonic Convergence Concert and various gigs we did around town as a duo that I did not mention yet, and was well advertised etc etc etc. on radio and flyers etc.. it was sort of his come-back as a musician HERE in fact.. we fact fact fact played a NOTED concert at the band shell just before the summer of love re-do...I see you kept that which I added but NOT mentioning me and blocking the whole thing, even re-submitted toned down. now talk about shameless and wrongful .. you keep blocking that even in neutral text. The video is available and a priceless collector's item in fact which has not been made available though it could be and in fact three songs (the ones I wrote and sang)will be on YOUTUBE by end of year but am waiting for them to come out as having been wanted by other musicians for their upcoming CD's.

WHY would you block even some tamed down reference to THAT concert... it was so well-received by thousands and very much enjoyed by Its' a Beautiful Day members in particularly David as well as Zulu Spear and others on the venue.. it was for charity. and yes....

There WAS a world tour scheduled (all to use Harleys in fact) as much as possible) for Mean Ol' Frisco and the manager of it was former manager of The Animals whose name escapes me. What I said at first about WHY it was cancelled is so re the King Snakes - untalented French wannabe pet band of Mathe'...at the time and though I don't expect it to be part of the article of course actually .. Mathe's issues with who was to play backup to and with Wilhelm was in fact so... and as you may know from that film, Mike Wilhelm is not easily told what to do (and Mathe' did come here, we did have long talks about much. when he was not hitting on my girlfriend in what he thought was secret, lol) and issues of radiation from Chernobyl reaching Finland that was on the tour, which included Montreaux... put the kibosh on it.

and that short-lived film I added .. .1968 the movie .. not bragging guys but just saying...it was ME featured in the TV trailers for the pic (a producer was related to Forbes) it was ME playing drums in the trailer plus some documentary footage...and a few quick shots of the "stars." Was that by chance? I think not. You (nor would anyone) not know, as I changed my appearance each time quite well, I was a (featured) extra in that film in 4 other ways, and then as a SAG-credited actor/musician whose soundtrack contribution counted as lines. Music director Cipollina asked me to be in it, then Mike. Then I got Eric (Doc Maraque) an invite though in reality he was actually more of a hanger on who played maracas in one song so I gave him that nickname.

how you can leave out the harmonic convergence concert is beyond wrongful. how you can love to find reasons to diminish and invalidate to the extent you do my image in your minds is I suggest well-worth looking into and taking to whatever venue might be appropriate in the guidelines of wiki if this does not connect to a more human and reflectively objective side of your judgment

HOWLIN' WOLF The story alone on my site is enough to justify it being a link it is the ONLY story of actually KNOWING him and so much about him and things we shared. The biography (also has such stories of course) nevertheless REQUIRED "my" interview of Howlin' Wolf to clarify WHY he ran from his uncle and to essentially make the meat of ths first chapter, as I think the authors will also agree with... after all they built my site for me for the offering of this treasured interview which has a 2nd part of two songs unknown to any save Wolf and I and done partly as harmonica lessons but wonderful songs soon to be out on some compilation if I can find the proper CD producer.

NO ONE of other thousands could tell the authors what I had on tape with Wolf. and... in Wolf OWN WORDS and voice. the story of this is on my site and nowhere else TOO

My NAME is on the LOGO of the West Point HWBS and frankly besides a concert to make money for people who own half the county what do they actually do for Wolf???? I say this in relective neutrality... they never met him and are rather clueless about much that I personally experienced though I am fond of them for my reasons in that at least they exist to the point they do.. but in fact Wolf was NOT born in White Station/West Point but ABERDEEN as was made clear by the recent NEW blues trail marker THERE oh yeah and. Wolf's own words on this matter. These are all easily verifiable facts.

I am very glad the bio book came out, beyond that they used my interviews, and photos and other stories (some of them) of my knowing Wolf so well... they mention my site and in fact wanted my photo on the cover though Pantheon opted for that depressing gaunt end-stage sickly with cigarette photo, being clueless as to true blues meaning especially in relation to Wolf's dynamic vibrant style and peak appearance . No need to show sickness to show blues in ones eyes that I was able to capture and in fact only i if you really dig into my photos FREE for all to see and THE ONLY ... did i say ONLY ? ONLY ones of Wolf at HOME, of his FAMILY, my photo of Wolf and Wife Lillie was the photo used at her funeral.. it's inspirational... and telling.

Wolf chose me to be his photographer and wanted me to get credit. Yet (for chief but far from only)example your UK Pictorial Press's Tony Gale now has to be sued by Redfern and Getty for robbing me and thus mainly them of so many funds since 1976... The photos ARE ... IN FACT.. THE.. ICONIC PHOTOS... even Steven Lavere will say so... and in fact Wolf's current estate/foundation who wants them for free of course, as millionaires never have enough....and NONE of whom met Wolf! Or quite get who and how he was with (except perhaps the stepdaughters having at least some awareness having lived with him but from what I know, for years miles apart in understanding or interest) am happy if they and I and the rest come to some type of working relationship ... could be in the works.

The photo #1 and now #2 are (#1 on 25 or more CDs and in thousands of books and news articles never ONCE mentioning my name . #2 a recent infringement Top Target is more easily dealt with ... but is MINE and I don't see why you righteous editors would NOT want THE iconic photos to be ON this page as a link.... I never expect to sell one photo from such things as never have yet.... partly because I don't offer cheap digital prints

You are welcome to USE free one or two of my photos so empowering to those who see them to see such a view into the real Wolf, as my photos have levels of him none other do... and of course I want photocredits and a link to my site . think about it.

a) your invalidation of my connection to Mike Wilhelm and our own work shared is laughable and sad and much unpleasant to see such stuff from those who were not there in any way shape or form.. but that can be verified simply enough \

b) your exclusion of my (formerly long running link) on Wiki is in fact a diminishing of Wolf's image to those who can read far enough into the article to see the links... his grave site is one matter.. His bio... which is great is no more revealing in some ways (as author admits) than those of my story , the photos that could only have come from a very unique relationship rare and special... his business cards are another thing. they are shown and show Wolf as Way ahead of his time in creative PR... no other place shows them ...they are FREE to see... they pop up larger... hell, yes i ask fees for one to own some... or to get an image of copyable quality I need a contract. i have lost hundreds of thousands of dollars by thieves and bootleggers.... and live paycheck to paycheck n disability pension while supporting some people in great difficulty with every cent I can obtain. In fact this matter as to who and why may make international news at some point but cannot get into it here

my site is a better museum than west point's... go look... it's almost a token joke and sad to me , in fact am about to give them some photos just to make it better...but they put the last one I let them use for a poster/t-shirt in the news and it got out all over the net as it was electronically distributed with neither copyright or sanction to use only in assoc. with their festival so sadly then had to deal with educating them and blocking such publications back in '03

your post to me kahoutek (would much prefer your proper real name but is nearly midnight now, really bears some self-evaluation and a better look at how it does meet the guidelines you use to justify some pretty wrongful exclusion and in fact there should sure be a means of taking this to a higher venue if all I said is not making sense but to reinforce your wrongful opinion far too hastily and seems jubilantly rendered and I hope not as maybe you have time and funds to play with arguing and such but as for me, having been involved in the real struggles of major importance - in particularly helping educate and inform and enforce the National Civil Rights Act and having other matters to focus on hope this at least makes a few points clearly enough.. so am not challenging your power but appealing with more facts and consideration these matters I hope you can give another look into and decision that affords me a link and neutral mention in true documentable and, above all, meaningful and useful material and connections that will only be good for people to have at their viewing. and if ever what I say seems self trumpet blowing those things can be edited without an all-or-nothing wrongful dismissal not even knowing how things really were are and have been, to say the least, which is possibly unprofessional and contradictory to encyclopedic truth, but likely simply human error as we all can make , for that matter

Best regards

Sandy Guy Schoenfeld

I will at some point re-add how it ought to be in most neutral all true non-adjectivial terms if can stay awake long enough now but likely later after spending two whole days on this and forgoing essential matters to make truth be heard, or at least written :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Howlingsandy (talk • contribs) 06:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Per your recent advice to fiscuss this first, I hereby request my Howlin' Wolf photo site be re-added to the Howlin' Wolf page and at the very least in the last form in which it was seen, and as it had been in fact for years and for the following reasons (I include quotes from the biographers and Wolf's own estate and foundation (of which I am a member! Perhaps the only non-related member.) regarding the importance of my work in depicting the real person Wolf was, and advocacy to the legacy of this great and influential person. other such from diverse media is withheld in interests of this comment not being a book, but a "talk")

Are you planning to read this actually? Hopefully in my following your request and taking your advice to first discuss it on the page's talk area (here is only place I could find, please forward to page's talk site if such actually is there) ...so this is evaluated in the spirit of how it's intended, would be nice if even by your own self. Calling the addition of my Howlin' Wolf photo site spam is a travesty and no purported encyclopedic-oriented mind or system could accurately misconstrue such a term, especially in the case of my photo site and the purpose for which it is offered here.

From Wolf's own multi-generational estate (now also the "foundation")

>Laura, *brochure graphic artist*

>Please be advised don't delete the pictures after use >as we may revise/edit brochures and/or create scholarship applications brochure. Sandy is now a part of the Howlin' Wolf Foundation and our concerted efforts. As we determine future projects and usage, Sandy will be involved with determining use of photos (one of the collaborative responsibilities Sandy has in the organization).

>Thanks for all you do!!!

> Respectfully,

> Ellery L. Williams

and

> Sandy ... I believe that you are an asset to our mission as we are to yours. In the greater scheme of themes you were....and are a part of the Howlin' Wolf legacy. Hypothetically speaking, if there were 5 original components that made the Howlin' Wolf engine churn, it doesn't make sense to recreate and not use any of its original components. I will identify the resources that are available and get the engine churning better than before. It is my responsibility to ensure the success and continuity of the Howlin' Wolf legacy. On behalf of Howlin' Wolf, Inc. and the Howlin' Wolf Foundation, Inc. we welcome your thoughts and/or suggestions. I will make every effort and due diligence making decisions for these corporations. Every decision I make will be an informed decision with thorough research and analysis. I believe that you are passionate about Howlin' Wolf's legacy. Our collaborative efforts will allow us (...etc.)

-- Next, look at the West Point link... see the photo they have (blurry as it is) and see whose name is there next to it. http://www.wpnet.org/About_HWblues.htm

Then, per Wolf' biographers: (from where most of your page is built) See their site http://www.howlinwolf.com bottom of front page, and then these pages there: http://www.howlinwolf.com/articles/bio_1.htm http://www.howlinwolf.com/talkin.htm their THE BIOGRAPHERS LINKS SITE SAYS www.howlingwolfphotos.com

"More than 50 fantastic, newly available portraits of Wolf, including some of the best we've ever seen of Wolf in performance or in private!" (from 2002)

http://www.howlinwolf.com/images/playing/wolf_play.htm

and yet those hard-working and diligent and invaluable authors never met Wolf, while I was asked by him to stay with him. He taught me harmonica. We made two songs. We discussed things that only now are being revealed and he was prophetic about matters, or wise in ways few are and especially more so all things considered

It's not rocket science to one who studies and teaches how humans think and take in and assimilate or alter information and sensed matters (oh, maybe then it is rocket science, well anyway) -> Not everybody gets the essence or the total sense of a subject, especially a person with even part of the abilities and life of Howlin' Wolf, from reading. My site is the ONLY site that shows a) MANY and DIVERSE photos; b) deeply meaningful and sensitive PORTRAITS, FAMILY PHOTOS, ON THE ROAD CONDITIONS, WOLF WHEN HE WAS STILL VIBRANTLY POWERFUL, and not posed for some label as the old Sun stuff which is fine in its way but actually those of the man being himself with someone he had time and reason and interest to be himself, not just a stage/performance function.

Of course people want to SEE more deeply the genuine article of one of the most influential and charismatic and in fact, going by over a thousand emails I have received, life-changing, human beings in the world, a genuine wounded-healer as my STORY depicts so well. The story on my site is alone a degree of presentation of the man that Chester Burnett was and what his legacy genuinely conveys and that is the whole point of my wanting my site to go back on "yours". To be rejected in the face of some of those add-ons far more exploitative of the image and legacy of Howlin' Wolf bears reconsidering even if you yourself cant or don't see the true meaning and intent of my efforts to keep my link there.

Unless of course you don't value an open mind and heart and instead consider your views and attitude ever-perfect and never failing and needing no room to gain some wisdom beyond knowledge how about yourself kindly placing it back on there if you would.

Consider: who's photos do ALL media use when discussing his home life? Mine. Do they wish to talk about it and not have it shown? No. Views of his wife and him, usually mine as the photos I took are not just "great pics' but depict and show and transmit levels of character and dimensions of who he was in a number of levels and ways that none other can or have, as well as their relationship and that photo was used as the photo at her funeral.

I speak of the portraits, too. The world deserves to see these photos. ALL can see those elucidating and inspiring photos for free, to read the story there which is not fan trivia but speaks to how Howlin' Wolf REALLY was in contrast to the stupid, wrongful and ugly comments one sees (at times) on YouTube and blog comments and social sites and such, about him being a drunk a dope addict, etc. or low skilled etc... usually by racists or otherwise deranged or horribly misinformed commentators. There might indeed be less of them if my site were added. NONE of the other added links folks did that (confronted Wolf's detractors) nor did they work to support the national civil rights act and enforce it as did I (unless some there in just one add on site I haven't yet contacted ever had, but likely not regarding Howlin' Wolf, in any case, since the day we met (and in fact even before.)

My site has *** the only real documentary and artistic record of Wolf as the person he was beyond performances *** plus, it shows his cards (full photo-sided business cards years ahead of their time WE made... and all the rest I have already covered.

I knew and know this man and others on the music (and many other) pages of Wikipedia WELL and can depict and describe him and anyone I discuss VERIFIABLY *BY PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE* and more than my own references (AND CORRESPONDENCE AND TAPES/RECORDINGS MADE TOGETHER etc.) along with only a very few others I know of, in their own way, but nearly no other especially regarding Chester Burnett (Howlin' Wolf) of how he was in his day to day moments as well as the deeper issues of his childhood some (not all) which were a mystery until my interview was transcribe into the book (in this matter and a few others)

I'm not some lucky fan that got a chance to snap a few shots. LOOK at the photos , look INTO them ... you seem to have some interest in aspects of music... See the Wolf that is the real deal and try if you have it in you yet to sense what it took, read about what we shared and how we had come to a connection enabling us to create those photos.. and it takes seeing them to get a better GENUINE SENSE of who he was.. there is no GOOD reason to not add my site) Please find a good one to add it. There is an abundance of them.

With out much of this and the physical/visual evidence and information that is referred to by my photos and story of he and my special connection, the current overview is somewhat sterile and facile and of all people to lay that on it's not Howlin' Wolf

Other requests will be following if needed by Howlin' Wolf's biographers and/or estate and including major UK/USA music magazines etc.. request my site be placed back on the page in question, though I should not have to ask them to do so given what was just shown you, sir.

consider why my site should be added, the actual value and meaning, - for the sake of Wolf's legacy and accurate depiction .. and I would ask you to look into yourself some, if possible,. to ascertain why you would so wrongfully misjudge my site so vigorously

By the way, if I were adding content to the main section I would NOT leave out that Wolf confidently predicted a black U.S. President... almost 40 years ago or that he continued taking music lessons himself or that his generosity and compassion was evidenced by his keeping "rival" Muddy Waters going when Muddy went broke.

That will serve to offset the great misinformation that was part of the significant 'Hollywoodization' of the true Chess story, as seen on Cadillac Records

the Wiki article on Howlin' Wolf lacks a type of sense of the man my photos (as a link to see with the story available) will help correct. Also, you can grab #2 anywhere on the net and use it (for that page only) but if you use it I insist on the photo credit by name "with permission of ...etc.) at the very least if not directly linked BY the photo itself.

Best regards,

Sandy Guy Schoenfeld www.howlingwolfphotos.com Howlingsandy (talk) 20:29, 18 May 2010 (UTC) had just accidentally placed on wrong subject area so re-setting to this Howlingsandy (talk) 20:40, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Howlingsandy (talk) 20:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your controversial The Left banke page move

I have responded to your comment on my talk page. -- Starbois (talk) 17:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Irish bands: Rory Gallagher, Thin Lizzy/Phil Lynott

Hi, I thought I'd contact the people who may be willing to edit/contribute to the Thin Lizzy articles, and the ones for Rory Gallagher and Phil Lynott. These are the people who have shown interest that I've thought might be involved, including yourself:

• Bretonbanquet talk
• DISEman (talk
• NotoriousTF (talk
• Discographer (talk
• Kohoutek1138 (talk
• Agadant (talk
• BNutzer (talk
• Leahtwosaints (talk

I've begun to add photos to some of these articles, and more will follow! This will necessarily involve expanding the band page, and should flow into the individual members pages as well.

About the people I listed, DISEman and Discographer both are willing to help with discography and album pages, (and some has been done already for Rory Gallagher, separate from the article). Agadant, Kohoutek1138, and BNutzer may help with editing if asked nicely- I already did in advance for Rory Gallagher, but they may be prodded into helping with the Thin Lizzy articles. That leaves myself and you! I think that joining the

This user participates in Wikiproject Belfast.

Wikiproject:Belfast if you haven't done so... it should help in making articles on people like Phil Lynott, Brian Downey, and Gerry McAvoy more of a priority. Maybe we can enlist the help of others on the Wikiprojects for Irish music?

I sent to the UK and got a hardback book by Gerry McAvoy: Riding Shotgun 35 Years on the Road With Rory Gallagher and Nine Below Zero. I suspect that it's more about McAvoy than Gallagher, but it should help somewhat as a solid reference and I've got two playlists in You Tube with live interviews with Rory Gallagher. I've also begun another playlist of documentaries and special interviews for Thin Lizzy and Phil Lynott. My You Tube playlist site name is 4rainbowed there. Do you have a You Tube site? If we connect there as friends, you can see all the Lizzy and Rory stuff I've gathered. Let me know what you think about all of this. Please ask other editors who may have an interest in these Irish bands to join us, and we might possibly have a Wikiproject we can list so others might find us! --Leahtwosaints (talk) 16:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Howlingsandy

Wow. I tried reading through this user's comments but gave up. Often if an editor is this stubborn and insistent on his agenda they tend not to give up too easily. You may need to turn to WP:ANI and maybe WP:RFC to get some administrator input. I don't know too much about the topics of those two articles in question, but it appears to me that what you're doing is correct, for all the good that will do with this particular editor. freshacconci talktalk 14:35, 23 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My Back Pages

I nominated My Back Pages for GA. We have been working on this on and off for a while now, and it seems to be in good shape. The nomination backlog seems to have cleared considerably since Chimes of Freedom - we are starting at #32, so we will see how long this takes. Rlendog (talk) 17:08, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kohoutek1138. You have new messages at Robsinden's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: QueryOne

Saw the discussion and posted a brief comment. What you outlined is pretty clear and accurate, so hopefully this will lead to some sort of resolution. Thanks. freshacconci talktalk 16:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Music Inspired by Lord of the Rings (Bo Hansson album)

On June 14, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Music Inspired by Lord of the Rings (Bo Hansson album), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:03, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Live in Boston

Thanks for your message. The main thing about your edits to the article is that the 1985 Shanghai release is a pirated record, and shouldn't really be part of the article at all, likewise the Varrick release. The Castle releases are, at best, dubious. All of the other releases of the Feb 1970 concerts are unofficial (Live in Boston, Cerulean, Boston Tea Party etc etc), and only the Snapper release is semi-official. In my opinion, it is the only notable release of this audio and the others should just be mentioned as a relative footnote. Similarly, all the various versions of the "London '68" concerts are pirated, like the majority of Fleetwood Mac's 1967-80 live material. Bootlegged and pirate recordings are not usually considered notable enough for Wikipedia articles, and now the article is based almost completely on a very hard-to-find, illegal, non-notable release. In fact, the 1985 release was not the first release of this concert audio anyway, there being a number of earlier (also illegal) vinyl releases. The fleetwoodmac.net discography (which I partially wrote myself) is not really a reliable source and includes bootlegs. I was not aware that review info is no longer included in the infobox, but it wouldn't have been too difficult to just create a "Reception" section rather than delete it and ask me to do it. Certainly, deleting reviews from more popular albums without relocating them just starts edit wars. I'll do that for the other album articles when I get time - I wrote most of them anyway. The album chronologies should always stick to either studio or live albums as far as I know, and not mix them, and never should they include unofficial or pirated releases. I agree with your edits for the date linking though. Thanks again, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I with you that I'm not a fan of including reviews at all - I never add them myself and I'm not convinced they're encyclopedic. I didn't mean to seem abrupt, by the way.

I didn't say that "Live in Boston" was a bootleg, but I still believe it to be a pirated release, in that the tapes were not intentionally released for the production of records in the 80s, because the identity of the true rights holder was under debate. This is why they're such appalling quality, and why a lot of the songs never appeared until the Snapper release - because not all the tapes were leaked. I know the band have no control over any Green-era live material, or archival releases bar the BBC stuff, and that the members receive no royalties, but even so, the early Boston records were even less officially sanctioned than most. They may have been legitimately available, but were not legitimately produced. In any case, I think the article is misleading now because it promotes an album that is very hard to find, and information on the full version produced from properly-licensed master recordings has been removed, and it's this version which is more relevant. I propose at least to reintroduce all the info on the 3CD version. I realise that there is no doubt some over-strict infobox guidelines that prohibits this information being put in the infobox, but it should be somewhere. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:51, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. We definitely don't need any other track listings, but we could probably mention some of the other releases. There are a lot of different covers, but I think maybe adding a scan of the Snapper cover might be an idea, in the "alternate cover" field of the infobox, since this is the cover many people will be familiar with today, and it's a legitimate use of that field as far as I understand. If the guidelines want the original version's timing / label info in the infobox, I guess that means the 1985 release in this case, although I'm not ecstatic about it.

The earlier versions are certainly pirated - for example I have one somewhere called "Boston Live" dated 1978 with eight tracks on it (if memory serves). I have another 70s LP of part of one of the gigs, clearly recorded from the crowd, an obvious bootleg, though it's better quality than some of the later versions. There's no reason why Dopson would have known about these, since there were certainly not legitimately available. I agree that the 1985 version was the first release available in shops, even if its provenance was shaky.

I'll have a think about what could be said about the earlier versions, though reliably sourcing it might be hard. About the only freely available info about those amounts to little more than the fact that they exist. A lot of what I know came directly from Mac's sound engineer at the time, also from Jeremy Spencer (who's still mad about it), and an interview with Mike Vernon which I'll be lucky to find again, to be honest - but I'll have a look for it anyway. There could certainly be extended prose on the Snapper release though, and it might be easier to say that's an officially licensed version, being careful not to imply too strongly that the previous versions were improperly licensed, if I can't find a good reference for that. Technically, that might lay us open to a complaint from someone, if Shanghai Records still exist. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:08, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, good, I'll add the Snapper cover to the infobox - I have it scanned though I don't have the CD with me at the moment. It's interesting about the current cover in the infobox, because I'm not actually sure what cover that is - it might well be the European one. I don't have an album with that cover, but the British cover is much like the Snapper cover but with "Fleetwood Mac: Live in Boston" in small print at top left and the Native American is more in the centre of the sleeve. Most of the sleeves are much like that, or with a live photo, like the "Looking Back on Fleetwood Mac" album, for example - another Boston show LP. I agree about careful referencing and using the Snapper notes as much as is useful.

The Snapper release is not official in as much as it's not an "official Fleetwood Mac-controlled release" - in fact there are no Fleetwood Mac-controlled archival releases. But it's at least with the permission and assistance of whoever owns the rights to the audio these days. It may well be that Mick Fleetwood was either aware of the Snapper release or OK'd it, but I don't know for sure. He was party to the release of Live at the BBC so it may be a similar thing. Clifford Davis was supposed to have owned the audio for a long time, but he either didn't care enough to control its use, colluded in its "release", or sold it without the permission of the band he had managed. I'm not sure who owns it now. I think that's how a lot of this stuff left the control of the band, amid the court case in 1974, and also Green, Kirwan and Spencer being elsewhere (not least mentally elsewhere) in the 70s and 80s, and Fleetwood & McVie being busy with superstardom. I'll expand the info on the Snapper release when I get home and dig out the CDs, or you can do it if you want to and have time. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree about that - we may have had to wait a lot longer for the tapes to be released officially, or even semi-officially. As it was, fans had years of enjoyment out of them, despite it being a bit shady. At the time, it was the only Green-era live stuff available, apart from the bootleg tapes floating around. I'd also agree that whoever decided which songs would be on the 1985 album, they made a good choice. About the Snapper discs, they are excellent, but I find they're best taken one disc at a time, basically as if you were present at the gig - unless you're really in the mood for all three discs of course :)

Yes, I'd agree that the cover that someone put in the infobox is probably the European/American cover, and therefore is likely to be the most common. It might also explain why I've never found that cover in my record shop-trawling days - when record shops were more common :( - and yes, Castle albums covers were usually pretty awful! Let's be glad that's not in the infobox ;) Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, would you be so kind as to give us support!

Hello, I hope you're doing fine and I sincerely apologize for this intrusion. I've just read your profile and I've seen you're a learned person and also an enthusiastic reader of comic books, so I think you have an acute vision of what is right or wrong and know that with (great) power comes (great) responsibility. My name is Claudi Balaguer and I've come here asking you to help a minorized language and culture and maybe I am not bothering you and you will help us... I'm a member of a Catalan association "Amical de la Viquipèdia" which is trying to get some recognition as a Catalan Chapter but this hasn't been approved up to that moment. We would appreciate your support, visible if you stick this on your first page: Wikimedia CAT. The X-Men, Spider-man and the Fantastic Four would support our cause if they could, actually the only ones who wouldn't are the Green Goblin and Galactus. Don't let Lord Sauron win the battle, please! Thanks again, wishing you a great summer, take care! Capsot (talk) 11:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fahey's Yellow Princess release date

Hi. Please see the talk page on The Yellow Princess re: the release date. Join in. I don't know why the Fahey files (official site?) shows 1969 on the album page but the song notes state 1968. Thanks. Airproofing (talk) 03:00, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

JetBlack500

All I can say is I sigh with you. I'm powerless to interfere after our earlier run-in over at Alan Vega. You'll note there at the end of the discussion she promised to add extensively to the article. I'm still waiting. Wwwhatsup (talk) 06:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A Thankyou

		The Teamwork Barnstar
		For improving articles with others within the Dylan project. Richhoncho (talk) 12:59, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Reviews in Infoboxes

I am aware of the change and will eventually get around to adding reception sections to all of Mellencamp's articles. However, I think that the reviews should stay, in some form or another, until that time.BillyJack193 (talk) 20:10, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Rough Guide to Bob Dylan

The edition I use is the first, ISBN 1-84353-139-9, so this is p. 268 of the first edition. I only own the first edition, so if you see me citing this book again, assume it is the first edition. Thanks.BootleggerWill (talk) 18:35, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

Hi Paul, I recently created the article telling about the band Dantalian's Chariot. And, today the notability tag was added on top of the article. I'm not sure which steps to follow, but I sure know that the article fits the at least one of the criteria, "Is an ensemble which contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a member of two or more independently notable ensembles." Would you mind taking a look at the article and help me deal with the situation? Thanks in advance. Elitropia (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the fast reply, Paul. While creating the article I did dig all over the internet and couldn't find much but the individuals' blog entries which wouldn't be the reliable sources. Please feel free to edit the article and add references (especially books if you know any). Elitropia (talk) 19:38, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Easily passes WP BAND #6 "contains two or more independently notable musicians". I've removed the tag. Wwwhatsup (talk) 22:33, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, thank you for your edits on the article! Feel free to do it again, anytime. Also, thank you Wwwhatsup, for your contribution. Elitropia (talk) 10:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, when you have time would you also look at the references that I used in the article July to avoid the same happening? I have no music related books. Thanks in advance. Elitropia (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Dandelion seeds" and "You missed it all" are great tracks, too. But again, unfortunately there is not much information available on the internet about them. They were a short term band. Thank you once more, Paul. Elitropia (talk) 05:40, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Kevin Kelley (musician)

On July 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kevin Kelley (musician), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Cirt (talk) 12:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My humble present for your help

		The Invisible Barnstar
		For your significant and helpful contributions to the music articles, without seeking recognition for your work. Elitropia (talk) 10:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July

Hi Paul, I noticed that earlier, too. But, in the Jade Warrior page it is actually unclear, after returning to England in 1966, the Tomcats were re-named July, it doesn't state they were re-named as July exactly in 1966. And, no I don't have the CD. Elitropia (talk) 12:06, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Paul. Please, don't hesitate to ask more. Elitropia (talk) 17:09, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Paul! If I must say, when I read articles I mostly prefer to read few lines of lead then the history. If I'm really interested in the topic, I go read the whole. So, it'll be useful to keep the few lines of lead, methinks. Having a short history section shouldn't be a problem with all those references. Also, I was looking up more about the band, and stumbled into this page [1] which isn't a reliable source, but you might want to see. Elitropia (talk) 20:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, Paul. the article in your sandbox looks great but one line there puzzled me, "the Playboys .. changed their name to The Thoughts and then The Tomcats".Well, here is the inlay I figured, The Thoughts were formed via the merge of the The Second of Thoughts and The Tomcats;

The Second of Thoughts - P.Campbell-Lyons, T.Duhig, J.Field, ..

The Playboys - T. Newman, A.James, P.Cook, C.Jackson >> changed their name to The Tomcats

The Second of Thoughts and The Tomcats merged >> The Thoughts - T. Newman, J.Field, T.Duhig..

The Thoughts merged with other members of The Second of Thoughts >> went to Spain with the name Los Tomcats - A.James, C.Jackson, T.Duhig, T. Newman, J.Field, .. >> the five members I wrote the names were the remaining members and they changed their name to July.

In the Facebook page Peter Cook is the current member, it never tells that he was in July back then. If you look at one of the posts in their wall, they posted a photo telling that it was the original July and there is no Peter Cook listed. But, I'm not sure if that page is official. Also, the citation needed part of the article, I looked it up all over and couldn't find anything. Elitropia (talk) 07:21, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Paul, my mistake, it's the Second Thoughts. I've been looking, reading more about it. About the inlay I wrote earlier (please correct me if I'm wrong);

Jon Field and Tony Duhig formed the band called Second Thoughts with Patrick Lyons.[2][3]

>>The Second Thoughts - P.Campbell-Lyons, T.Duhig, J.Field, ..

You say "the Playboys were Tom Newman's skiffle band which formed in the late 50s, and which evolved into an R&B group called The Thoughts (see the Newman biography on Allmusic), and then finally became The Tomcats," but according to Jade Warrior it's like this; Tom Newman Alan James, Pete Cook and Chris Jackson had formed the first incarnation of the "Tomcats".[4]

>>The Playboys - T. Newman, A.James, P.Cook, C.Jackson >> changed their name to The Tomcats

According to this article "Jon Field and Tony Duhig put together in their first bands The Thoughts and The Second Thoughts." [5] Which means Jon Field and Tony Duhig went onto the Thoughts. So, that the Second Thoughts and the Tomcats formed the band The Thoughts.

>>The Second Thoughts and The Tomcats merged >> The Thoughts - T. Newman, J.Field, T.Duhig.

Later, T. Duhig (again from the Second Thoughts) joined to the Thoughts to create a re-formed line-up of The Tomcats (Los Tomcats).[6]

>>The Thoughts merged with other members of The Second of Thoughts >> went to Spain with the name Los Tomcats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elitropia (talk • contribs) 18:52, 4 July 2010 (UTC) Elitropia (talk) 18:54, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning Paul. Facebook page lines up the first incarnation of the Tomcats.[7] with Pete Cook in it. We know Playboys came before the Tomcats, but you're right, this doesn't make it sure that the exact members were also in the Playboys. On the other hand, we sure then have to use the reliable references as you mentioned, which tells us that the Thoughts came between the Playboys and the first incarnation of The Tomcats until I come up with a reliable reference that shows the first incarnation of the Tomcats came in between the Playboys and the Thoughts. Meanwhile looking out there more, I also figured John Speedy Keen was also in the Tomcats at some point as a drummer [8] that we can use in the article. Elitropia (talk) 06:51, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I still think that there was the early Tomcats in between The Playboys and the Thoughts, I will look it up more when I have enough time for that but I don't think proving this is important now especially where all the other sources we use wouldn't mention about it all. By the way, I just found another fact that July were managed by Spencer Davis.[9]. This page shows the The Tapestry of Delights as a source. Maybe you might want to see. Elitropia (talk) 09:48, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you make a google image search for the CD, it gives some results and even you can see the two pages of booklet. And, thank you for your contributions, Paul. Have a nice day. Elitropia (talk) 10:06, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. But, then Epic Records should be deleted from the infobox? Elitropia (talk) 09:18, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. I'm guessing, we are done with the article for now(?). Thank you, Paul. Elitropia (talk) 11:04, 6 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Greetings Kohoutek1138 - Just to let you know I've just removed an item you tweaked at List of songs banned by the BBC. I realise you were just wikifying the reference, but it's a primary source, so out it goes. Cheers! --Technopat (talk) 16:57, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discography Database

Hi, Paul. I've been trying to improve the Tintern Abbey article. For the EP Do What You Must, Disocgs and Rate Your Music pages gives so different years. And, Allmusic doesn't even give the correct album. I for now used the Discogs page as a reference. How to make sure? Are there any other reliable sources that you know? Thank in advance. ~ Elitropia (talk) 12:24, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And, I didn't know about 45cat. Bookmarked. ~ Elitropia (talk) 17:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thanks for the additional info, then. But when I create the discography sections, I don't get stuck with one page anyway, check them all, in any page I can find. Recently I created the discography for the Dutch band The Outsiders, but it was really not easy since any source available was telling different dates, and labels (which is mostly the same story with any other '60s). If you like take a look at it? ~ Elitropia (talk) 18:05, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Thanks for the heads up. I placed a warning on the IP's talk page and further reverted Cher's albums and singles discographies, as it appears the vandalism has been going on for some time. Eric444 (talk) 15:07, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If they keep it up, I would suggest taking it to WP:AIV. Eric444 (talk) 15:20, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Echoplex

thank you for your contributions !

in February I had added the story of the EDP, I do not know why I was not identified. I only realized now that my text was gone, beause Kim Flint died.

being the developer of the EDP, I am biased and being swiss, my english is not so nice, but still, I think my text contained deeper information than the one Sean added recently (thank you Sean!):

"1994 Gibson released the Echoplex Digital Pro, a digital live looping tool, not intended to be similar to the tape Echoplex. The design was licensed from Matthias Grob who had created the LOOP delay in 1992 and without his consent, Gibson placed their brand Echoplex on his invention in order to achieve bigger sales. While the tape Echoplex was made to create short delays and echo, the Echoplex Digital Pro, also called EDP, was the first design dedicated to the use of live recording for instant composition and sound layering. Its Record function finally allowed to define the delay time while recording the phrase to be repeated and Multiply made rhythmically precise changes of this delay time possible, all while playing. another 25 functions made the EDP a standard and its interface was imitated by many other looping tools. Since Gibson resisted to create a more modern model as proposed by Matthias and his partner Kim Flint at Aurisis Research, the EDP was built without changes until 2008. Although its 68000 processor (same as in the Macintosh Plus) was completely driven to its limits with the 2002 software upgrade LOOP IV and the hardware was mono and slightly noisy, the EDP keeps on being sold for over 500 US$ on eBay due to its musical user interface and some unique functions due to its tape like memory structure. All newer LiveLooping tools and even the EDP imitations like Mobius and SooperLooper use a Sample oriented memory structure which is easier to program but make the intuitive flow over the loop start point more difficult."

the relevance of the EDP is hard to question, if you search on Ebay, you will probably find that, by making live looping popular, it has a bigger influence on music history than the tape machine had. We could consider starting a new page for it though. I find especially important that its the only digital looping tool that maintained the memory characteristic of tape

I would really appreciate to see your fix for this situation! Thank you Matthias Grob —Preceding unsigned comment added by Matigrob (talk • contribs) 05:42, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lovecraft Sources

Many thanks for your interest in improving this article. I believe a primary source was Warburton, but please give me a day or so to get my mind back to this article. I have the Valley of The Moon album, but believe that I was using other sources--would have to be, in terms of referencing the second album, which I do not own.

Again, many thanks for your concern with respect to this page and the H.P. Lovecraft page.

Dreadarthur (talk) 02:03, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some references in support of later band membership and also the background of Marty Grebb. I should have referenced better at the outset; many thanks for pointing this out. The Fabulous Rhinestones merit a separate page, in my view, if you have an interest here and are inclined to develop this; it skipped my mind, despite original intentions. I am currently caught in Bill Bentley (producer) and, in terms of the usual constraints of competing life obligations, won't be out of that page for awhile.

The H.P. Lovecraft page is very, very nice and complete, blending both bands as I now see, thanks to your efforts. I believe that the successor Lovecraft band was better than credited. Thought Dolinger-Been was going to become a major songwriting team, based on Valley of the Moon.

Dreadarthur (talk) 14:27, 27 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've only just noticed your articles on H. P. Lovecraft and H. P. Lovecraft II. Great stuff!! Have a cookie... Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:49, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, don't know if you've noticed but I've suggested a slight amendment to your suggested hook at DYK. Happy to discuss it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 06:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1980's LoveCraft band

Hi Kohoutek1138 I recently added some info to the HP Lovecraft article based on my experience as vocalist with Tegza, Capek et al in the band's final version (about 2 1/2 years). These edits were removed without supporting docs which I understand. If you're interested I have back stage passes, band pics, articles, clippings, contracts etc. that document what I wrote. I'm not very web savy, but you can reach me through my website: www.schererjewels.com Capek is still in Chicago as is Mark Gardner and Joe Jammer (Although Joe will be in England in two weeks for about 3 months of acoustic pub gigs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.16.82.153 (talk) 23:49, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I'm replying here because you don't have a Wikipedia account with its own talk page. Hopefully you'll check back and see my response.

My problem with your additions, aside from them being a little non-neutral sounding, is that this line up of the band is mostly non-notable by Wikipedia standards. That is to say that because this line-up never released any records or made any high-profile appearances, they don't really meet the Wikipedia notability criteria (see here). As a result of this relative obscurity, nothing has ever been written about this group by any reliable third party publication (at least not that I can find). The threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability, rather than truth, and therefore this latter-day line-up shouldn't really be covered (see here for a detailed explanation of the Wikipedia verifiability guidelines).

Having said all that, I'm inclined to include at least some of your additions because you’ve made it clear that you were actually in the band, rather than just a fan or someone on the periphery. I also feel it's worth mentioning this line-up, at least in passing, because there is obviously a connection with the earlier Love Craft and, by proxy, with H. P. Lovecraft (the subject of the article). Therefore, I will re-add a couple of sentences about this 1980s LoveCraft line-up for completeness sake and take your word on good faith. By the way, if you can point me towards any reliable info on the web about this version of the group I'd be very grateful. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for H. P. Lovecraft (album)

On 24 August 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article H. P. Lovecraft (album), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 12:04, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hi Paul, you mind joining to the discussion in List of psychedelic rock artists' talk page? What you think matters. Thanks. ~ Elitropia (talk) 12:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan articles

I've been quiet for a while, but I had a favor to ask. I have been working on "Love Minus Zero/No Limit" trying to get it into GAN shape. I think it is in good shape, but it would probably help to have a sample clip of the music, and I have no idea how to do that. Could you add a musical example to the article? Of course, any suggestions/edits would be appreciated as well.

On other Dylan topics, I finally started the article on "Lay Down Your Weary Tune" that I promised you - probably about a year ago. I borrowed a couple of lines from the Turn! Turn! Turn! article to cover The Byrds' version, but you may know more. I can wait a couple of days before making a DYK nom in case there is some good Byrds material to use there.

I have also done some work on a couple of song articles you have worked on - "It's Alright Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)" and "All I Really Want to Do". The former in particular may be getting close to having enough material for a GAN, although there is still some work to be done, particularly the lede and the list of recordings at the end. Anyway, I look forward to continue working with you on these and others. Rlendog (talk) 00:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if an article on Galaxy (band) can be done

Here's the talk page of the redirect.
Here's the Youtube video:
Galaxy - 06 - Day Without the Sun [1 of 2]
I understand that they were from Jacksonville. If so, then at least another great band came out of that city.  ;-)  70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You Ain't Goin' Nowhere

Per WP:POUND you're not supposed to use number signs that way. So "peaked at number six" is correct. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^(Otters want attention) 21:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Clarke (musician)

I appreciate your offer of editing help here. I honestly didn't see what I was doing as involving substantially unsourced material. I was the one who added the "refimprove" tag in the first place, as you will note from the page history.

If I can't contribute in manners that are viewed more consistently as constructive, I will have to address how to better use my time as a volunteer.

You may want to review my challenges to some of the harsher remarks on my Talk page. Please do not assume that there is a substantiated history of inadequacy here or deliberate contravention.

I look forward to your help and thank you again for your offer.

Dreadarthur (talk) 22:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you perhaps have another editor take a look at what was excised? The German/Danish band histories, particularly of Firebyrds, is relevant, in my view, as illustrating the consistency of his active musical involvement and how this relationship with Clark then turned into the contentious "20th anniversary celebration". Is the site that has been excised any more or less authoritative than the "Byrd Watcher" site, which seems frozen as of 1997 or so? I honestly don't know. The latter has some references, but I don't know if it is regarded as a generally authoritative text.

I agree that referencing Crosby's later liver transplant, while perhaps interesting in terms of comparative life histories of Crosby and Clarke, is essentially irrelevant to a page on the life of Clarke.

Please appreciate that I didn't originate the page, but was trying to improve on what was there, as well as to correct such inaccuracies as I might find. Perhaps compare what was there before I chose to volunteer my time to try to make it better. I believe I succeeded, to an extent. The external links taken out weren't put there by me; I suspect placed by a Clarke family member.

On another note, things got much better with your involvement with the H.P. Lovecraft (band) page (as above), so I believe that things will likely get better here as well.

Dreadarthur (talk) 22:34, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many, many thanks for your thoughtful and constructive comments here, including your detailed justification for why the Byrd Watcher site is regarded as an authoritative source. (What happened to its originator? It's like the site suddenly stopped, without succession arrangements, and despite having a discussion forum ["Ask Dr. Byrds']) Unlike you, I am not an expert on The Byrds and so very much look forward to seeing how this page gets better through you. The H.P. Lovecraft (band) page is now an particularly good page through your input.

Many thanks again.

Dreadarthur (talk) 02:25, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am reluctant to do much more directly on this page, based on deficiencies in my previous edits. Instead, over the next while, I propose to raise on the Talk Page potential issues to address or points to include. I've already raised one point in relation to his age. Perhaps then you or others with comparable expertise could address adding to or editing in a substantiated manner the page itself. I have reviewed your Kevin Kelley page and agree that this is the level to aspire towards. I don't have the Byrd biographies referenced, and so believe that others like you, in possession of similar information, are better able to get the Michael Clarke page up to the superior Kevin Kelley level. Does this seem reasonable?

The more I read about him, the more fascinating I find Clarke, in that he was consistently a musician for his entire life, while at the same time developing his painting abilities, going back to his time in Hawaii after the fractured Notorious Byrd Brothers sessions. In addition, despite various conflicts, he seemed to remain on good terms with all of the original members (and remained on good terms with Gene Clark throughout, including when the others were suing Clarke) until he and Gene Clark started the various "other Byrds" bands, and, in particular, when Clarke went out alone as The Byrds. His performance impairment through drinking appears to have first become evident in Firefall, when he started missing shows, yet others, such as Jerry Jeff Walker, continued to want him as their drummer.

Dreadarthur (talk) 17:37, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have read your comments on the Talk page and thank you for taking the time to provide such detail. In terms of the "fired or left, or both" dimension to the Notorious Byrd Brothers sessions, I suggest that some of what you have written should be in the main text or in a footnote, with the text sources referenced. I haven't read these works, while you have; hence the great difference in the quality of perspectives here. This is perhaps where I have a problem in terms of Wikipedia expectations, in that I prefer to see qualifications or supplementary detail in footnotes.

I note that the Notorious Byrd Brothers page is largely yours. It is superb, in my view, adding much to music history.

Dreadarthur (talk) 15:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your additions to the page in relation to The Notorious Byrd Brothers sessions. Better than many/most could have done, including yours truly. I will continue to add queries to the Talk page, as issues come up. Also to The Byrds talk page. Far better for me, at least, to be contributing to page improvements in this area through the "Talk Page" approach. Similar to what I have encountered with Van Morrison-related pages, such as Them, there is a very select group with superior knowledge (and superior sources) here.

Dreadarthur (talk) 17:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to add material as you have suggested.

Dreadarthur (talk) 06:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the event that this might be of interest, I have favourably discussed the foregoing debate/editorial review and direction, in the context of criticisms of Wikipedia:

http://brucelarochelle.wordpress.com/2010/12/11/wikipedia-serious-editors-serious-criticism/

Dreadarthur (talk) 21:43, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gene Clark Brief Return to Byrds, 1967

From what I have read, Gene Clark returned to The Byrds for no more than a couple of weeks following the firing of David Crosby in 1967. Yet I found this YouTube video that shows him on a television program (Cavett? Smothers Brothers?) singing "Going Back":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olqvPg3GL1M&feature=related

I don't see this referenced on the Gene Clark page. Also can't figure out who the drummer is on this, or whether any of this should be referenced on the Gene Clark or Byrds pages.

Dreadarthur (talk) 06:48, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looked at the video more closely. This is quite historic (at least for the less informed, like me)--proof that Michael Clarke and Gene Clark returned to The Byrds in 1967 at roughly the same time. This would tie into your page comments that Clarke in particular returned to fulfill contractual obligations. Amazing to see them coming together to do this song that Crosby hated so much.

Dreadarthur (talk) 06:54, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further to your suggestion, I have added some material that will need better referencing (I don't believe YouTube is to be cited, based on copyright breaches?). In reviewing the Gene Clark article, it appears that it will benefit from a lot more citations, as your time permits.

Dreadarthur (talk) 02:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the references and revisions to Gene Clark during the fall of 1967. It is evident that the article needs much more of the type of referencing you are capable of adding.

Dreadarthur (talk) 00:25, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a small bit concerning Clark's contribution to the Notorious Byrds Brothers album, leaving citations as a matter of your choice. There is so much important material that is coming out here through the input of you and others with such detailed knowledge of Byrds history.

I am wondering if it might be worthwhile for you to seek a direct or indirect interview with McGuinn, Crosby and/or Hillman, to the extent that this has not already been considered. I used e-mail exchanges to address missing facts on the John Witmer page, as a more minor example.

Dreadarthur (talk) 00:35, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your cautions and explanations in relation to the above. Still much for me to learn.

Dreadarthur (talk) 17:02, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editorial Assistance/Intervention Sought in relation to Le Hibou Coffee House

Following the constructive interchange in relation to Michael Clarke (musician) and related, I am wondering if you know of an editor who could take a look at Le Hibou Coffee House and authoritatively assist. It is in the midst of a mess due to disputes between former owners as to its "true" history. I know this as referenced to my own background and current events among the principals of which I have become aware:

http://brucelarochelle.wordpress.com/2010/11/24/van-morrison-le-hibou-1970/

Any assistance in an editorial referral here would be appreciated.

Dreadarthur (talk) 20:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another music sample request

I've been slowly working on a couple more Dylan songs: "Just Like Tom Thumb's Blues" and "It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding)" in hopes of getting them to GA. I think they are getting close, although they would both benefit from a musical sample and any other edits/suggestions you may have. Do you think you could take a look at them and provide the musical samples? Thanks. Rlendog (talk) 02:55, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Kohoutek1138. You have new messages at Courcelles's talk page.
Message added 04:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]