Talk:Syd Barrett/Archive 1

Confusion

Was that last edit nessisary? I mean, it only removes information. I much preffer the older version. If no one objects to it I'm reverting it. -- Underwater 00:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Is it worth mentioning the syd barrett following and some of the cult created around him and ideas he has come to symbolise, its fairly important in shaping the pupular image of syd barrett and he has become a bit of a che style icon for a lot of people. 131.111.8.99

His mother has been dead for many years: Syd is not, as a recent correspondent in Wire magazine recently pointed out, Norman Bates. The doorstep and pork chops bit is local gossip which seems to have become urban myth. It has, as far as I am aware, no basis in fact and I'm therefore excising it, unless it can be proved true.sjc

The comments about Syd Barrett's strange behaviour being caused by "taking LSD every day" are highly likely to be untrue. Tolerance to LSD builds extremely rapidly, and if he did actually take it every day it would have no noticeable effect on him after a couple of days. SM

• The "recent image" of Syd isn't recent, unless he has suddenly lost a couple of decades in age. More recent pictures of him show him as a middle-aged man, like the rest of the Pink Floyd members.

• Its recent in comparison to the other 2 which show him in the mid 1960's - Fizscy46 23:47, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

• Relatively recent is not the same as recent. That photo is mid-70s at latest. I'm removing 'recent'. Vague Rant 10:06, Sep 6, 2004 (UTC)

• According to a Barrett webpage, which has the photo in a set, the set of photoes were taken for the "Barrett" album. Thus, 1970.

Quoting the article: "He also almost all the tracks on the LP, as well as the band's first two hit singles "See Emily Play" and "Arnold Layne" (the latter of which was banned by the BBC)."

I am a little confused about what that sentence is trying to say (the "He also almost all the tracks" part) Akamad 13:27, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

Up until his death, Barrett still received royalties from his work with Pink Floyd from each compilation and some of the live albums and singles that had featured his songs; Gilmour has commented that he "[made] sure the money [got] to him alright."

I'm unclear on the exact meaning of this quote. Is Gilmour saying that he [Gilmour] ensured that Barrett received his money, as a friendly gesture? Or is he being facetious and saying that he [Barrett] made sure that the money got to him, alright. In kind of a boy-what-a-tenacious-bastard kind of way? I guess more context might be helpful. Thanks! Airosche 21:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

"He reverted to his real name, Roger Barrett, and spent much of the rest of his life living quietly in his hometown of Cambridge, England. Moving into his mother's suburban house, he passed the time painting and tending the garden. His former bandmates made sure Barrett continued to receive royalties from his work with Pink Floyd." - JILL LAWLESS, Associated Press Writer - http://www.sydbarrett.net/ trezjr 00:58, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The Independent just ran an article today that mentions the royalty issue in brief as well: http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article1173246.ece The link can also be used as a citation for the Wish You Were Here Sessions section and can dispute the anonymous poster's claims of the section being bullshit. --Undertow87 15:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Painting

See Category_talk:Art#Syd_Barrett and User_talk:Pigsonthewing#Syd_Barrett. My very very brief google search seems to suggest that he is not notable as a painter. If there are facts to show that he was a painter of some kind, which my search showed that he began with but soon dropped, then please add it in. MDCore 11:00, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I've removed the Category:British painters again. The additional information on Barrett's interest in painting is helpful, but he is not well known for being a painter. The comment on barrett spent ~5 years making music and ~35 painting implies that he hasn't played an instrument since leaving Pink Floyd, which is probably inaccurate. If he gave a solo concert today he would likely get a much larger audience than he would for an exhibition of his paintings. -- Solipsist 16:23, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I expect that if Barrett showed up anywhere to do anything, there would be a huge crowd. Stargoat 18:59, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I highly doubt Roger Barrett would ever play music again, as from what I know and read, he doesn't even want to discuss those years. --DylanL 05:50, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Previously unreleased track on "The Best of Syd Barrett - Wouldn't You Miss Me?"

EMI compilation "The Best of Syd Barrett - Wouldn't You Miss Me?" contains one previously unreleased track - "Bob Dylan Blues" (track No. 21 on the CD). This is significant enough to be mentioned in the main article.

Quotes

I'm pretty pissed off that a large number of insightful and relevant quotes have been removed and NOT placed at Wikiquote. What was the reasoning behind that? --bodnotbod 04:34, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

I have no idea why they were removed. I went back through the page history and found two from Gilmour and Waters and put them on Wikiquote. RedWolf 04:37, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

I'm pretty new to this -- how was my paragraph saying that Roger Waters dedicated their Live 8 set to Syd Barrett a misquote? It seemed very relevant, seeing as it brings the Syd Barrett story up-to-date.

I'm kind of confused at the quotes, seeing as the only one witha credit to who says it is from the Rolling Stones. The others have no relevance whatsoever to Syd. What's up with that? Griomp 22:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Photo Caption

The caption underneath the picture of the band (the second picture in this article) is wrong. Syd Barrett is standing second on right, not left.

Fixed. Gbeeker 20:15, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Encyclopedic tone

having read the Band Years section, I am not impressed by the article. Although it is informative it lacks encyclopedic distance. Referring to Barrett as Syd incessantly, and exhausting superlatives when describing what made him special. Examples:

Syd was one of the most original lyricists of his day

And so were some twenty other people at the time.

and was also an innovative guitarist, being one of the first to fully explore the sonic possibilities of distortion and especially the recently-developed echo machine.

This bit could also be improved on by just saying he was an early explorer of sonic possib... blabla.

As it is now, the article is about as good as any fan bio.

I agree. I have only read the same words over and over again about the innovation of Syd's use of the echo machine, nothing more. Also, what about how he got the nick name of "Syd"? For some reason, that doesn't seem to be explained too often. Griomp 22:11, 30 March 2006 (UTC)Grimp

Referring to Barrett as Syd incessantly - tidied that up. --duncan 19:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Later years, end lines

he reportedly paid no attention whatsoever to a Pink Floyd compilation that was given to him, although his sister reported that he had a "spring in his step", after watching a Floyd documentary. He reportedly told her that he enjoyed seeing his "teacher", architect and landlord, Mike Leonard, but found the film "a little noisy."

I was just reading through the article, and in my opinion these last few lines seem awfully vague, silly and irrelevant. I think they should definitely be either cleaned up or removed.

• Agreed. That whole paragraph is out of context now that I've re-written/re-arranged the article, and I never really liked the part you quoted, either. I say it goes. Darkhorse82

In interview with John Edginton [1] is mentioned that he (Syd Barret) was watching the Crazy Diamond documentary alone at his home and that he said to his syster: "It was pretty good actually, I enjoyed it."

134.171.27.77 08:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

More Music

I would appreciate more descriptiveness and specificity on Barrett's musical contributions, especially with respect to Piper At The Gates Of Dawn.

Also, why doe the article only mention the creation of ten tracks when there are 11? Who did the eleventh tack on Piper?Griomp 22:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Roger Waters wrote the song "Take Up Thy Stethoscope and Walk", which is track six. Underwater 15:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Syd Barret Died 7. july 2006.

Grahvem.

Featured Music Project evaluation

Syd Barrett has been evaluated according to the Featured Music Project criteria, most recently affirmed as of this revision. The article's most important issues are listed below. Since this evaluation, the article may have been improved.

The following areas need work to meet the criteria: Lead - Comprehensiveness - Pictures - References - Format/Style

The space below is for limited discussion on this article's prospects as a featured article candidate. Please take conversations to the article talk page.

• Lead: Too short, needs to summarize whole article
• Comprehensiveness: Mostly good, but needs musical style
• Pictures': Need fair use rationales
• References: Inline citations, needs non-biography print sources
• Format/Style: consolidate short paragraphs, especially under "Influence", also make "Influence more coherent as a section and less of a paragraphized list
• Chart positions should probably be cited inline, discography looks good

Mental illness

last edit added:

"In an article published in 2006, Gilmour was quoted as saying: "In my opinion, [his breakdown] would have happened anyway. It was a deep- rooted thing. But I'll say the psychedelic experience might well have acted as a catalyst. Still, I just don't think he could deal with the vision of success and all the things that went with it"."

any reference for this? --Wishmechaos 09:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The Independent newspaper, Jan 7, 2006 pages 22-23 Robma 11:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

---

Just a minor gripe, but the passage that states "some have suggested that Barrett had traits associated with Asperger's Syndrome, a condition most often placed on the autism spectrum."

should be changed to "some have suggested that Barrett had traits associated with Asperger's Syndrome, a condition which is part of the autistic spectrum."

suggested - 12 july 2006

Napster Link

I don't think that the link to Napster for the albums is at all needed in the context of Wikipedia. The page lists the albums, and people can buy them wherever they would buy music... Xinit 16:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, and removed. Interesting that Special:Contributions/Waldzazi chose to title his edit 'added link to free content', which seems blatantly untrue (at least I didn't see any 'free' content). --duncan 06:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Yes the content there is free. All that is required is a user name and email to play each album or song up to 5 times. Syd only released a few albums but in some cases this content can be very extensive. Bob Dylan has 71 albums for example. This is a new initiative at Napster that happened over just the last two weeks.

http://www.napster.com/view/artist/?id=10470748

P.S. Hi just checked that link and possibly you viewed the one album that only has 30 second samples Above find a complete list of the free tracks Waldzazi 09:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

'Napster's free music service is currently only available in the United States.' is what I get when I try it, with lots of links saying buy album / buy track, and some 30 second samples. I'm still not convinced the link belongs here, any more than I would link from an article about a book to a page on Amazon.com where I can buy the book (or view 'free' sample pages).--duncan 17:35, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Ahh ok I see the problem you are having, the links are only free in the US so far, they are negotiating for them to be worldwide. As far as not belonging here I think that this would be more like a link to an authors complete novels available to read in their entirety free at Amazon.com. They certainly belong here, I believe. If the site does well with this Napster will have leverage to negotiate a better bit rate and an elimination of the 5 play limit. Im suprised that the record companies even went this far with it.

In an effort to see what's required to listen to these free tracks, I went through the sign-up process, and it strikes me as pretty invasive and involved. For the most part, I'm not in favour of huge numbers of external links, and I would prefer them to be quality links that quickly provide the information. When linking to musical samples, I'd much prefer to see an immediate result.

Even a link to Amazon, emusic, or iTunes would be preferable, as they all tend to have immediately accesible samples without the need for a signup and proprietary download. At least it would seem that Napster understands how to deal with Canadian users (it listed prices automatically in CDN$...) but I'm seeing only 30 second samples just like I would with the other music sites.

People reading the article should have enough information to go on to check out the artist even without sound samples, and they can go get the tracks where they wish... Wikipedia shouldn't really be promoting one commercial vendor for songs over another, and I wouldn't want to get into a situation where we'd have to list all the other places to get tunes... Xinit 19:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The other places dont provide free content. How do you get an official ruling on this? Thres no point in posting the links if someone is just going to remove them all as someone just did. Napster plays the content in the browser at Itunes Store you need to download and install a complete program to access ONLY 30 second clips You sound like another guy who is very concerned about the Itunes Store. Why? The Itunes Store does not provide the type of content that we are reffering to here. You are the second guy now that gave me a demur specifically out of concern for the Itunes Store.

You're insane if you think I'm going to bat for iTunes specifically, I was just putting it forward as an example, alongside Amazon and Emusic; all three of those give exactly what I am able to hear when I go to Napster; 30 second samples. I have accounts on three different services that I use to comparison shop for price and selection, but that has nothing to do with wikipedia.

You will note that I didn't change the link; because I'm asking for the opinions of others.... I posted to the WikiProject_Music discussion page, and have heard back only in the negative with regard to the Napster Links campaign that smells of spam. In fact User:Jkelly, a Wikipedia admin suggests that all Napster links be deleted on site. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music#External_Links Xinit 21:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes I know, JKelly removed all of my links, which is why I was a bit abrupt with you, also the fact that another admin who removed links of mine whole argument seemed to be about not favoring Napster over the Itunes Store.

It took me a good deal of time and effort so I dont appreciate someone just coming along and removing them.

After doing a bit of research, it would appear that this isn't the first time this has happened, and it's bigger than just your links. It was borderline in my opinion without more information. With more information, the external links to Napster, iTunes, Emusic, etc etc, appear completely out of line with Wikipedia's mandate, so I would imagine you'll find all your Napster links reverted soon enough if they aren't all already... Xinit 21:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

It's officially bad: See here. Xinit 21:46, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Xinit, by the way you need to read what other people actually write before you engage in a debate with them. If you read over this page again you will see what I mean. I explained the situation about the content temporarily not being available for residents outside of the US and you didnt see that and continued to ramble on about how you can only see 30 second samples adding also that you are in Canada. Well duh, eh? In the meantime you could move to Buffalo NY and enjoy the free content from there. hehehe CYL. P.S. Notice that I did not call you a hoser, you hoser

You're really good at making your point here, boy I've been so wrong. Xinit 18:36, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No personal attacks please. --duncan 18:41, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Now now, that was just a joke, dont be such babies, if you can help it. Hey its not my fault the content is not free in Canada is it? I hear they are working on that. As far as points go, anyone that tells me that a link to 71 of Bob Dylans albums, all available in their entirety to listen to free of charge, does not belong in his Wiki entry is being disingenuous. I could use the same example in regards to most other artists, probably even some of your favorites. There are many many links on the Wiki that are useful that link to commercial sites so there are no hard and fast rules here. Its overbearing sticklers to the rules, in this case rules which are enforced in a totally arbitrary manner, like you guys, that always wind up ruining a good thing for everyone. I dont see JKelly deleting any links to say, IMDB, although he suggested I do so myself. I wouldnt do that. Promise me you both wont go now and recheck Napster and start posting that the clips are all 30 seconds yet again. hehe By the way Xinit, if you find a simple one time sign in of email and password "pretty invasive and involved" how do you deal with all the other complications on the big internets? Not a very good argument, dont you think? By the way Itunes Store requires a 20+mb download of the Itunes/Quicktime software and a reboot of older versions of Windows so you are factually mistaken on that point. As they provide no free content, nor does any other service except Napster, the point is moot though. Moot Camp Moot in fact! CYL Waldzazi 20:35, 19 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

It would appear that you're missing the point entirely on who is "factually mistaken" - I never stated that iTunes needed to be linked to... iTunes and Emusic were used as examples. I wouldn't support iTunes linkages any more than I'd support the Napster ones, based on the fact that you need to set up an account and install software to make use of either. If you want to see where this sort of guideline comes from, check out Wikipedia:External_links#Links_to_normally_avoid; specifically "Links that are added to promote a site" and "Sites that require external applications". I enjoy free music, but free music in and of itself is not enough to justify linking to it.

A link to 71 albums of Bob Dylan doesn't belong in his WP entry, and discussion of it doesn't belong here. You might want to look up that word... wiktionary:Disingenuous Xinit 20:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

You stated that "iTunes would be preferable, as they all tend to have immediately accesible samples without the need for a signup and proprietary download." and you are factually mistaken as I just pointed out to you.

You have just stated YET AGAIN "based on the fact that you need to set up an account and install software to make use of either." even though I have pointed out the fact several times that you DO NOT have to download any software to use Napster and the account is mereley a user mail and password and a one time thing, which most people unlike yourself do not find a tremendous burden. In fact its used right here on the Wiki! hahaha You deleted my posts and I was using Bob Dylan as an example in order to stress the breadth of the content available, but OK, Syd Barret would easily apply then. They do have Syds entire recorded works, FREE as well. I dont need to look up disingenuous because I know what it means and when someone tells me they find a simple email, password sign up "pretty invasive and involved" to make a point, I find that argument very disingenuous. I mean you do? How do you manage to use the internet?

1. fake or deceptive; as, disingenuous conduct or schemes.

Yup thats the fella!

Napster, Syd Barret and the WP:EL

1.Any site that contains factually inaccurate material or unverified original research, unless it is the official site of the article's subject or it is a notable proponent of a point of view in an article with multiple points of view. (See WP:RS for further information on this guideline.)

• Napster does not contain factually innacurate material

2.In general, any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes an example of brilliant prose.

• Napster does provide a unique resource, the music itself, free and frequently in its entirety.

3.Links that are added to promote a site. See External link spamming.

• If the content is of unique value such as IMDB, All Music Guide, All Movie Guide, Rotten Tomatoes, this rule is generally overlooked, I think Napster provides similar unique and useful content

4.Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.

• See answer to 3.

5.Sites with objectionable amounts of advertising

• See answer to 3 and note that Napster only has ads that appear in the player and are very unobtrusive

6.Sites that require payment to view the relevant content

• Napster does not require payment to view the content

7.Sites that require external applications (such as Flash or Java) to view the relevant content unless (1) it is the official site of the subject of the article (2) the article is about those media, or (3) the site is being cited as a reference.

• Napster uses Flash, but the site could be easily cited as a reference as a link to an artists complete output could well be considered a good reference.

8.Bookstores. Use the "ISBN" linking format which gives readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.

• DNA

9.A website that you own or maintain (unless it is the official site of the subject of the article). If it is relevant and informative, mention it as a possible link on the talk page and wait for someone else to include it, or include the information directly in the article.

• DNA

10.Blogs, social networking sites (such as MySpace) and forums should generally not be linked to. Although there are exceptions, such as when the article is about, or closely related to, the website itself, or if the website is of particularly high standard.

• DNA

OK back to you Xinit! Now I think we are getting nowhere....I mean somewhere! P.S. They also have ALL of Pink Floyd for free including Pipers at The Gates of Dawn, so Syd is pretty well covered. I didnt want to leave Syd out of the discussion! Waldzazi 22:50, 19 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

'4.Sites that primarily exist to sell products or services.' - Napster exists primary to sell music, regardless of if they're letting you listen to some/all of it for free in your browser. IMDB/RottenTomatoes/AMG etc do not primarily sell products or services; they make their money mainly from advertising revenue. --duncan 08:22, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Duncan all of these sites are commercial sites and they all in one way or the other support their content through the commercial aspect of the site. IMDB in fact does have subscription services as well. Remember there are no hard and fast rules here and if the rules you cite were enforced to the letter as you suggest then that content would not be allowed and we would not be having this discussion because I would not have a leg to stand on. This is in fact what Napster is trying to do now, the free content is supported by advertising revenues. The content is not free by the way, everytime you listen to a song the artist is paid at a fixed rate so it was a good bit of negotiating to get the record industry to go along with this for a share of the advertising otherwise they would go bankrupt trying to do something like this. Right now I see that a big sticking point is that the free content is not available outside the US but if they get the rights to Canada and UK in the future, for a start, I think this idea should be revisited. Content should be judged on its merits and not dismissed out of hand based on a strict interpretation of the WP/EL and it seems it has in fact always been judged this way here on the Wiki. Waldzazi 17:07, 20 May 2006 (UTC)Waldzazi

Have you got it yet

My understanding this incident garnered from DVD on Barrett was that Waters was the recipient of the musical send up, not the whole band as unit. Water's description makes no mention of all the band singing back "no we haven't".

In general, putting my two cents in, the descriptions in article of Mr Barrett's psychotic behaviours on stage etc, are a little tabloid, likely coloured by urban myth and multiple repetition, certainly more colourful than those I heard of the same events twenty years ago. It ought to be remembered that, yes, he is "only a person", and still very much alive. Referenece to his problems needs to be put across sensitively, some of the article to me reads as being almost immaturely gleeful on this score. Richard 11:18, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

please don't accept urban myth as fact.

I've just gone through a section of this article and removed some suspect material. However the hairgel and mandrax incident (highly UNLIKELY) may have been Jelly (jello - intended for human consumption) and crushed mandrax. People who put this stuff in have an obligation to be sure of the facts. I'll leave it to you to research it further; I recall 'jelly bath' incidents being part of the '67 - 68 UFO scene, but memory isn't good enough for such articles. Detuned guitars do not snap strings (take it from me I've made my living from playing them for 30 years) Besides, I've followed Barrett's story for as long and the wiki article is the first ref I've come across that mentions broken strings. Richard 11:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

hairgel and mandrax

I don't believe this reference is accurate. Could the person who reverted the claim please supply a reliable source. Richard 11:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Was hairgel a common product in the 1960's? answer = No. Do users (abusers) of drugs willfully waste / render their "jollies" unusable? answer = No. Richard 12:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

While I agree that this story needs a better citation, I don't think it can be dismissed out of hand so easily. For one thing, Brylcreem (the alleged product in question) WAS relatively common among the London underground hipster scene. For another, Syd was often observed to be in a psychotic/dissociative state; so why should we have reason to believe that he was behaving logically (willfully)? BotleySmith 00:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Granted but it doesn't say haircream, it says hairgel, which is a very different product to Brylcream. I'm not dismissing it out of hand (or I would have just removed it), I've asked for a citation as I think the claim is highly dubious, as stated previously I have read accounts of a vat of jelly used in a party (featuring the Floyd) at a London underground club at about that time. I have read also about substances melting over Barrett's face, but, not as described in this article (esp. the ref to mandrax ). Richard 08:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

The Brylcreem and Mandrax incident is well documented. Read "A Saucerful of Secrets: The Pink Floyd Odyssey", which is considered one of the must-reads regarding Pink Floyd history. It is covered therein. User:Sebbeng 22:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

RIP Syd

I don't care what anyone says about Syd Barrett... He was a revolutionary pop genius. Long after all the nay-sayers are dead and gone, people will still talk about Syd.

As much as I respect Waters & Gilmour, it was Syd who went to the edge and brought back Space Rock... Reclusive loony or not, he was a pioneer and he deserves major respect.

Just listen to the mad drama of Interstellar Overdrive...

Fame isn't for everyone. Who's to say that gardening and abstract painting are any less rewarding than being a "Rock Star?" And in the end, it is the music that matters the most.

"And what exactly is a dream?" (from Jugband Blues) - Syd Barrett 1946-1960

First member of the Floyd to die

Floyd are unusual for a band of their longstanding that none of the band members had passed on, until now. In deep mourning. Sorry, I know Wiki discussion pages are not meant as books of condolence, but.....his illness was kept quiet, wasn't it, I had no idea he was ill. It'll be interesting to see what Nick Mason has to say about it on the Mark Radcliffe programme tomorrow. Syd Barrett, founder of the finest rock group that ever walked this earth, R.I.P., and shine on.....Martyn Smith 18:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Small omission

Metallica also covered "Astronomy Domine" on their 1998 compilation "Garage, Inc."

no, they didn't. 88.157.85.167 19:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

They certainly did not. They covered "Astronomy" by the Blue Oyster Cult, thats what you were thinking most likely....

I second that statement -Mark ^{(Talk | Email)} 18:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Metallica may not have but Widespread Panic has on a few dozen occasions covered "Astronomy Domine" most of which are available on bootlegs. Phish was omitted from the list as well. They've covered on several occasions "Terrapin" and "Bike." -violanojblues

Date

Hello, I was wondering...did Syd die on July 7? A spokeswoman said that he died 'several days ago'. Source: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/13814051/, so that made me sort of wondering, you know... :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.145.128 (talk • contribs)

Yes, all sources I've seen that give an actual date give the 7th. See here and here. Kafziel 21:18, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh ok, I see. Thank you Kafziel.

http://www.DavidGilmour.com states that he passed last Thursday of Diabetic complications -NickSentowski 21:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Where? The only mention I see is on the front page, which actually quotes Music Week, and gives the date as Friday. - dharmabum 21:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Please sign

Why do some user post without signing?? Why some comments are posted with no respect for chronological order ?? It`s getting me crazy... --Doktor Who 00:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I added the talk header and a note for new topics to be added towards the bottom. But yeah, the comments on this page are out of order. Douglasr007 00:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

first mention of Roger Waters

This is the first time that Roger Waters is mentioned in the article:

"At another show Waters remembered Barrett putting hair gel...."

Shouldn't the first mention contain his full name and a link to his name?

Reverts?

I didn't revert anything on the talk page. I don't know what anyone is talking about by claiming I made a revert. I added a couple comments, realized I forgot to sign them and went in and added my signature. That's all. User:Sebbeng 04:59, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Douglasr007 and I were referring to this edit --> x, please watch it carefully and realize that you removed some paragraphs, likely unwillingly; it is not a big trouble do not worry. cheers. --Doktor Who 05:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

That's really weird, I don't know how it happened... sorry. User:Sebbeng 05:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, some paragraphs were deleted when you did the revert. I added them back. It's no problem. Douglasr007 07:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

"and I most obliged you for making it clear that I'm not here"

"and I most obliged you for making it clear that I'm not here"

We'll miss you more than we knew. I wish some great musicians like Hitchcock, Pink Floyd, Blur, David Bowie, The Cure, R.E.M., Radiohead and many more could tribute to Syd with a new CD or a Live Concert like the one they had for Freddie Mercury when he died.

Now more than ever we want to hear Syd's work bigtime. I suppose Syd would have hated the word BIGTIME, but i asure you a lot of his fans doesn't. And the paintings!! Show the paintings on a BIG SCREEN. There should be more art that expresses feeling. I need to see his viewpoint on canvas.

Greetings

Danie & Jaco

South Africa

"Your heroes for ghosts"

Syd's Death

Oh my god, just been reading this, which linked to this page.

Good article, what a sad story though.