Talk:Bluegrass music

West African
I can see some justification for this in the fact that a very significant part of BG music involves instrumental improvisation, often virtuistic, with the lead being passed around from player to player. This is also a basic element of jazz, which obviously has African origins. Of course, the quintessential BG instrument, the Banjo, is also of African origin. Wschart (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Its just as African as it is Scottish. The African influence is certainly diluted, but it is still factually there much as the Celtic influence is. Bluegrass takes quite a bit from jazz and blues, both of which are descended partially from West African music.--96.242.28.73 (talk) 05:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

black spirituals and bluegrass both have a very southern rhythm to them, i can see the relation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.250.209 (talk) 07:22, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Who removed the recognition of west African influence, and why? African Americans had a tremendous influence on Bluegrass. Even though this article does not explain the musical structure of Bluegrass, African influence should still be mentioned, especially since there is such a focus on the chioce of instruments; including the banjo, wich even Wikipedia says was developed by west African slaves. Sawbar (talk) 01:07, 3 December 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no citation given to simply state it to be so would be no different than making the claim on Blues, which well has no actual African connection musically. So find sources. 2603:6011:F400:DAC:4492:FE1D:3BB1:95A6 (talk) 14:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

African-American music as a stylistic influence
This has been in the info box for at least five years (I didn't bother checking any further back) and suddenly IPs are trying to remove it. It certainly isn't a typo, as the first attempt claimed. What's the problem? The "Creation" section states that the use of the banjo comes from Black musicians, which would seem to justify the inclusion in the info box as a stylistic influence. I'm restoring the status quo pending any new consensus here. Meters (talk) 23:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Agree. This has been properly sourced and established. The different edit warring IPs are the same person who is IP hopping and refuses to understand that just because all sub-genres of African American music haven't influenced bluegrass doesn't mean than none have. It's a clear case of one person assuming ownership of the article with no discussion. I have made a 3RR report. If that doesn't stop this nonsense, the page needs to be semi-protected. Sundayclose (talk) 00:49, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
 * So the Spanish influenced Blues, because they use the guitar, and the Piano is Italian so we just list Spanish and Italian as blues influence? 2603:6011:F400:DAC:4492:FE1D:3BB1:95A6 (talk) 15:04, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Here are some references about the stylistic influence of African-American music on bluegrass. Besides just listing this in the infobox, we should probably add explanatory text in the body of the article.

— Mudwater (Talk) 17:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
 * EastTennesseeBlues (Live).ogg

Requested move 8 August 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn: The Bluegrass music link from Bluegrass isn't used enough to justify making Bluegrass music the Primary Topic. Thanks for all your input everyone! – DirkJandeGeer щи 12:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

– Hello everyone! I had a look at the outgoing links for Bluegrass using https://wikinav.toolforge.org. It seemed to show that Bluegrass music was the most popular link people were following by a fair margin. I also had a look at the pageviews analysis for various "Bluegrass" pages including most of those listed on the current disambiguation page, and Bluegrass music was again the most popular, this time by a more significant margin. I think this shows that bluegrass music is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "bluegrass", but I might have missed something. I'd love to hear everyone's opinions on this potential move, and I hope you all have a great day!
 * Bluegrass music → Bluegrass
 * Bluegrass → Bluegrass (disambiguation)

– DirkJandeGeer щи 01:08, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose: Kentucky bluegrass and the Bluegrass (grass) genus seem too notable to consider the music genre primary. Page views aren't everything. And, taken together, the two grass articles are approximately as popular (and possibly a little bit more popular) as dab page destinations as the music genre is. The music, of course, was named after the blue grass. —&#8288;&#8202;&#8288;BarrelProof (talk) 02:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Pageviews aren't of much use as the topics differ in the extent to which they can be referred to by the unmodified term "Bluegrass". The Wikinav data gives us the best handle on usage in this case. While it's true that the music article is the one with the most clickthroughs, that's not enough, a primary topic with respect to usage has to get more clicks than all the other topics combined. That's not what we have here: the two grass articles combined get more dab clicks than the music article (there are some complicating factors; for example, someone could argue that the clicks for the two grass articles aren't due to different sets of readers but to the same readers who are just looking for blue grasses but can't figure out which of the two links is more relevant so they click both: that interpretation appears a lot less likely if you consider how the numbers stand in relation to the total views of the dab ). Uanfala (talk) 10:45, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * You're completely correct about the two grass articles, I managed to completely miss that the third most popular link was another form of grass, making the total "grass clicks" on par with Bluegrass music. Thanks for pointing that out I very much appreciate it. – DirkJandeGeer щи 11:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose - "the most popular" isn't sufficient. Not to be mean, but literally every disambiguation page links to one article that is the most viewed. If that were enough, we'd always have a primary topic. When you're going for pageviews as your criteria for PT, you need to have more views than all (non-PTM) articles combined. You might have more of a case for educational significance, but I don't see it presented. Red   Slash  18:49, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Not mean at all! You raise a good point. There's a chance I've messed something up here, but I believe Bluegrass music does have more pageviews than all other bluegrass articles combined. However as others have pointed out, Bluegrass usage data suggests that people are using it just as much for non-music purposes as for music purposes, meaning it's probably best to keep the page where it is. – DirkJandeGeer щи 11:48, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose - Not enough to support that it is the primary topic over other articles related to bluegrass. It's not terribly inconvenient for the reader to go the DAB page and then find the article they seek. Sundayclose (talk) 20:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose bluegrass is a popular plant found in places where the music isn't popular -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

2023 Amplifying Appalachia Edit-a-thon
This page has been edited as part of the 2023 Amplifying Appalachia Edit-a-thon. Edits include copyediting, adding sources, and more. RoxJox (talk) 23:24, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

Infobox image and caption
Hey folks. There's been a bit of back and forth recently, such as this, about the caption for the infobox image. So, (1) do we like the current infobox image? I do, but I'd be open to other suggestions. And (2), if the current image is good, then would a caption of "Flight, a bluegrass band" be okay if this reference was added to it? (Pinging, but all interested editors are encouraged to comment.)

— Mudwater (Talk) 23:26, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You have to provide a reliable source that the actual image in the infobox is Flight, not just your opinion about who it looks like based on another image. If you and I look at the same picture, we may not agree that it is the same band that's in the infobox, so any conclusion based on another image is a synthesized conclusion and not allowed on Wikipedia. So this source is not adequate. The page for the image in the infobox has nothing about Flight, so I don't see how it's possible unless you can find the identical image elsewhere that is identified as Flight. As to whether it should remain in the infobox, I think it should be changed to a well-known bluegrass band that is available for use. I think the current image was added just because it was someone's favorite. We need a better known band. For that matter it doesn't even have to be a band. The previous image of Bill Monroe's band was very good except for the fact that it had a confederate flag in it, which makes it unacceptable. If we had a different one with Monroe's band that would work. I would prefer an image of just Monroe over the current image since he basically started it all. We could also use an image of Flatt and Scruggs, who were also early legends in bluegrass. Sundayclose (talk) 00:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * As a temporary measure, how about if we change the current caption from "A typical bluegrass band" to "A bluegrass band"? The current caption is ambiguous as to how the band is typical.  And also their being typical might be a judgement call, a.k.a. OR.  — Mudwater (Talk) 01:38, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with that change. But I really think we need another image. Sundayclose (talk) 01:41, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've made that change, here.  As for a new infobox image, I'm open to suggestions.  Using a picture of Bill Monroe or another well-known traditional bluegrass musician or band would certainly be reasonable, and I agree that the previous image isn't appropriate.  — Mudwater (Talk) 02:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

Connection
Use of an instrument is not enough to link a stylistic origin to a genre. 2603:6011:F400:DAC:4492:FE1D:3BB1:95A6 (talk) 14:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

The Petersens Band
This article seems to slam the Petersens Band, and it also infers that the Petersens band is not bluegrass, but folk-rock. From the article:

"At the same time, several popular indie folk and folk rock bands such as the Avett Brothers, Mumford & Sons and Trampled by Turtles have incorporated rhythmic elements and instrumentation from the bluegrass tradition into their popular music arrangements, as has the Branson-based band The Petersens.[38]"

Whilst the reference in the article [38] refers to is titled "The Petersens – The Enduring BLUEGRASS Family Band Gone Viral" The article referred to: https://www.savingcountrymusic.com/the-petersens-the-enduring-bluegrass-family-band-gone-viral/

By what AUTHORITY does the author claim that the Petersens Band is not bluegrass?

It is my assertion that the Petersens Band is a bluegrass band, based on the authority of the International Bluegrass Music Association (IBMA): In 2018 the band placed 4th in the International Bluegrass Music Competition in Nashville.

In coming days I will be editing this article to remove the slamming of the Petersen Band, and to assert that the Petersen Band is a bluegrass band.

Incidentally, The Petersens Band now has in excess of 800,000 subscribers on YouTube.

Disclaimer: I am not associated with the Petersens Band. If there is interference with my assertions, I will take it to Wikipedia dispute resolution. Lesiz (talk) 23:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)