User talk:Joanne.nathan

Welcome!

Hi Joanne.nathan! I noticed your contributions to Take It While It's Hot and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Binksternet (talk) 16:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Revival (Tony! Toni! Toné! album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page New York (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:21, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Unreliable sourcing

Please do not use the Facebook page of the subject you are citing as a source, as you have in numerous articles adding Unique Recording Studios. Third-party sources, independent of the subject or topic, are preferred. Thank you. isento (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

AllMusic is a better source, because it is independant of the subject you are citing, i.e. Unique Studios. The studio website is not an ideal source, because it is not independent of the subject, the studio itself. isento (talk) 16:35, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

By the way, you do not have to email me personally. There is my own talk page, but I would prefer you ping me here instead if a conversation has already started on your talk page. isento (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Like this: {{ping|Isento}}, followed by your message. isento (talk) 16:42, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@Isento:ok sorry i sent another email - I hope I did the ping correct?Joanne.nathan (talk) 16:46, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, you did correctly. isento (talk) 16:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

This image, from the websites you've shared, does not prove the album was recorded at the studio. It is just an award presented to the studio in commemoration of the album's sales certification - it does not say what the studio's role was in the album's making, whether it was recorded or mixed there, or whatever. You need to cite a source that explicitly says "this album was recorded at Unique", rather than a source that depends on our own presumptions. isento (talk) 16:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

@Isento:Hello Isento - I hope I am not presuming anything other than the obvious. When a Record label orders and authorizes a Gold or Platinum record plaque for an artists' record, naming the recording studio where recording work was done, what else would it be other than the recording studio did actually record and/or mix a song or songs on that artists record. Many times is a studio is listed and it is not specified whether a studio recorded, mixed of did both. Gold and Platinum RIAA awards are not available for anyone to purchase. They never have been. Recording studio do not call the RIAA and order up Gold or Platinum records with their Studios name on them. They are always given by the Label to show appreciation to the Recording Studio for the work that was done recording the record. In the 25+ years that i have owned an operated a recording studio this has always been the procedure. Has something in the Record industry changed since 2004? I mean why else would a recording studio have been given the award? Not to be sarcastic but it wouldn't be for serving coffee? Joanne.nathanJoanne.nathan (talk) 17:17, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Well, the infobox studio field is for studios where the album was recorded, not mixed (Template:Infobox album#studio). And the absence of this information elsewhere among online sources begs the question, why hasn't an independent source connected the studio to any of these albums? As WP:SPS says: "if the information in question is suitable for inclusion, someone else will probably have published it in independent reliable sources." isento (talk) 17:30, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Especially in cases like It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back, which has received an abundance of both journalistic and academic coverage, there is no mention of Unique, not even in low-quality sources. isento (talk) 17:38, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

What is your agenda here? This particular obsession with the studio... stop it. isento (talk) 15:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020

Hello, Joanne.nathan. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. isento (talk) 15:55, 5 July 2020 (UTC) In ref to Unchain My Heart (album) edit. Please note that on the page it states Under Production

• Mixed by Chris Lord-Alge at Unique Recording (New York, NY).

I edited the Unchain My Heart (album) Wikipedia page to list the studio in the section, where the recording studios are normally listed. Is that a conflict of interest? or would be adding a link the Unique Recording Studios wikipedia page under Production, Is that a conflict of interest too? The guidelines say that linking to an external website would be, but please explain why is is a COI to link to an existing Wikipedia page that I did not even create. Joanne.nathan (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Taste of Chocolate. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 20:40, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Joanne, as I said before, the studio parameter of the infobox lists the studio(s) in which the album was recorded, like Template:Infobox album#studio says, not where the album was mixed. More importantly, this is the kind of problem that can result from conflict-of-interest editing. Your edit history suggests you are editing here for the purposes of advancing the interests of your studio rather than the articles themselves. Many of these articles you edited had sourcing issues to begin with, and by editing with the purpose of highlighting your studio, by giving it prominence in these articles (which is not the point of the articles), more issues with sourcing resulted. Your interest in the studio conflicted with the interests of Wikipedia as a whole, with its purpose. isento (talk) 22:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello isento Thank you for your reply. As a new Wikidepia user, I am willing to learn all the correct rules. I wanted to inform you that I am not being paid, or trying to advertise or promote a recording business that been closed for over 16 years. I have no financial gains. Wikipedia has become a new found hobby of listing unpublished history and giving credit where credit is due.

re: the studio parameter of the infobox Please reference where in the Wikipedia manual it states that mixing a record is not part of the recording process? I did find this definition of Recording studio which states "A recording studio is a specialized facility for sound recording, mixing, and audio production of instrumental or vocal musical performances, spoken words, and other sounds."

I could not find any reference to your claim that "the studio parameter of the infobox lists the studio(s) in which the album was recorded" and not where it was mixed (mixing is part of the recording process) in the link below https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_album#studio Please adviseJoanne.nathan (talk) 23:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

"If the album was recorded in a recording studio, enter the name and location." (Template:Infobox album#studio) It does not say to include anything other than a studio in which the album was recorded. Merriam Webster defines "record" as "to cause (sound, visual images, data, etc.) to be registered on something (such as a disc or magnetic tape) in reproducible form" ([1]). "Mix" is defined as "to produce (a sound recording) by electronically combining or adjusting sounds from more than one source" ([2]). Now, I'm not an expert here, but it is my understanding that recording refers to capturing the music performed in the studio on to some medium, while mixing is a related process dealing with managing the recordings, the captures. And it is my understanding that the article you pointed to, that it made the distinction also, between one studio where the album was recorded and another studio where the album was mixed, supports this distinction. Now, in regards to the infobox, the purpose of these boxes in general is "to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article (an article should remain complete with its summary infobox ignored). The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." (MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE) As a courtesy, I looked into the project talk page archives for possible discussions about listing studios where the album was mixed, and I found this thread which seemed to argue similarly that listing such a studio does not seem essential. And I agree. But you are more than welcome to start a new thread at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums raising this issue to see what other editors think and can do in response. isento (talk) 00:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I would argue for inclusivity, listing every recording studio that was used in the making of the song or album. Binksternet (talk) 00:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello isento

I concede that you have more Wikipedia knowledge than I. But Please, if you are going to make decisions about the importance of recording vs overdubbing vs mixing, I would suggest you do some research about the state of the art. Don't just take my word for it, ask any artist today about the importance of mixing and you will find out that all three and equally important. The basic tracks get recorded first. Next, the vocals are overdubbed. Then backing vocals are overdubbed. Then solo instruments and/or horns & strings are overdubbed. When all the parts have been recorded, then the mixing process begins. The mixing finalizes the recording. Mixing is the critical final stage of the recording process. Most artists will spend a few hours to record a song and then spend days in the studio mixing that same song. So in comparison, an album is usually recorded in a week and then mixed for about a month. The mix engineer gets paid 5x to 10x the hourly rate compared to what the recording engineer gets paid. Famous mix engineers get paid flat rates per song ($1,000 -$3,000) plus points (Percentage of the record profits). Famous mixing studios command 3x-5x more than recording rates because of elaborate automated mixing consoles and specialized mix gear. I hope this view clears the air regarding the cost difference of recording vs mixing.

Finally, please take a moment to read this Wikipedia page Audio mixing (recorded music) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio_mixing_(recorded_music)\

"Electronic recording became more widely used during the 1920s. It was based on the principles of electromagnetic transduction. The possibility for a microphone to be connected remotely to a recording machine meant that microphones could be positioned in more suitable places. The process was improved when outputs of the microphones could be mixed before being fed to the disc cutter, allowing greater flexibility in the balance.

Before the introduction of multitrack recording, all sounds and effects that were to be part of a record were mixed at one time during a live performance. If the recorded mix wasn't satisfactory, or if one musician made a mistake, the selection had to be performed over until the desired balance and performance was obtained. With the introduction of multi-track recording, the production of a modern recording changed into one that generally involves three stages: recording, overdubbing, and mixing."

So in today's record making process, mixing is the last chance to correct, enhance and perfect a recording, to the artists liking. Please reconsider your positionJoanne.nathan (talk) 01:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not doubting the importance of mixing - I don't need another poorly sourced Wikipedia article to educate me on that - and I've directed you to the best venue for you to get your concerns heard. But these articles are meant to be read by a layperson, a general audience, etc. (WP:AUDIENCE). And listing one studio you owned in the infobox of numerous articles without proper verification offers very little for a reader's understanding of their topics and does a lot more in setting a bad example for editing practices. isento (talk) 04:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello isento Here is a link to engineer Chris Lord Alge's web page where Mr. Alge mentions engineering and mixing Joe Cocker's Unchain My Heat album at Unique Recording. https://www.chrislordalge.com/about. I have contacted the Audio Engineering Society and Society of Professional Audio Recording Services regarding your incorrect viewpoint regarding the role of a mixing studio in the recording process. Joanne.nathan (talk) 12:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Awesome. isento (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

"After all of the individual tracks of a song have been recorded, a mixing engineer steps in to work their magic." This is from Sage Audio, a member of those organizations you said you contacted, and their wording suggests mixing is a process distinct from recording, which echoes my supposedly incorrect viewpoint. isento (talk) 21:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I am glad to see you followed my advice and started a discussion at the relevant project talk page(s). isento (talk) 22:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Paid editing?

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Joanne.nathan, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Joanne.nathan|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Please also note that your user name implies shared use which is strictly not allowed. Theroadislong (talk) 20:44, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps I can clear this up. Joanne Nathan emailed me on June 29 about my many reversions of User:Uniquenyc who had added Unique Recording Studios in New York to a bunch of song articles but without supporting references. (Joanne and Bobby Nathan were the owners and operators of Unique.) Joanne Nathan registered her username the same day. On July 1, Uniquenyc was renamed Bobby Nathan at Uniquenyc. I described to Joanne by email how WP:SECONDARY sources were greatly preferred on Wikipedia, but primary sources could be used for simple facts. She began to re-add her recording studio to song and album articles, using a combination of secondary and primary sources. I would not classify her as "paid"; instead she has a conflict of interest, but it's not an insurmountable problem. Binksternet (talk) 21:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

The user name is a combination of both of the owners of the recording studio, which surely implies shared use? Theroadislong (talk) 21:24, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Nathan is Joanne's surname, after her marriage to Bobby Nathan. It's her name alone, not a combination of users. Bobby has his own username. Binksternet (talk) 21:41, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, my mistake. Theroadislong (talk) 21:47, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 11

An automated process has detected that you recently added links to disambiguation pages.

Unique Recording Studios (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Usher, Bad Boys, Bob James, Cameo, Suddenly, Read My Lips, I Apologize, Shannon, Standing on the Edge, Coming Around Again and Black Reign

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Unique Recording Studios, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page DMX.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:11, 25 July 2020 (UTC)