Talk:DeGarmo and Key

Fair use rationale for Image:DeGarmo & Key.jpg
Image:DeGarmo & Key.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:52, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:DeGarmo & Key.jpg
Image:DeGarmo & Key.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:17, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Needs Cites/Refs
Other than the 2 "general" cites, there is virtually no references for anything in the "FACTS" section. I'm not certain as to how to place a references needed box in the article. When time allows I'll try to start running down references. The discography is not the usual presentation and should be re-worked most likely too.THX1136 (talk) 02:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Much of the band's work predates the Internet so online sources will be hard to come by. I just noticed that the one source is WP:SPS, which is a problem. has a fair bit and I'm sure there are a few others. Jesus Freak Hideout has nothing useful, but crossrhythms has a few reviews and articles. ISBN 978-1459645868 will certainly have something about the band although I don't see anything at truetunes.com, the print editions would have something as well. I'll tag it as well. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:12, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Discography
moved from my talk page

Was wondering about the reasoning of your revert of the discography section? I was going by what I've seen in many other articles. I'm asking to learn, not to argue. I have no skin in the game other than to improve the article. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.THX1136 (talk) 22:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * A further question: been banging around and ran into Don Cusic's book and the Billboard book by Barry Alfonso along with a 3rd book of similar content. All have similar info on D&K. Are these acceptable sources for backing up info on the group? Thanks, again!THX1136 (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm moving this from my talk page because it relates to this article.
 * The reason I gave is that the form of the discography template "incorporates song titles". Most discographies point to album and song articles. There are none for D&K works. I don't know if any of them meet the criteria AllMusic has some reviews and more ratings, and I'm certain that reviews exist in CCM Magazine, Cornerstone, Campus Life Magazine, Harvest Rock Syndicate and other publications that were around at the time, but I don't have access to them. Unlike Terry Scott Taylor from Daniel Amos, Eddie Degarmo doesn't seem to have kept records of those reviews and interviews, so it's hard to source them. All that to say, I don't know if the albums merit articles based on current criteria, so until we get them, the current format does give additional detail that the simple table will not be able to.
 * As for expanding this article, yes, those sources appear to meet WP:RS, but can see if anyone has questioned them in the archives at WP:RSN. I don't know if you have access to but that's also an excellent three pages of content. With that said, it lists peaks on Christian radio (not sure if that was MOR, CHR, rock, inspo, as it seems all formats are lumped together) but it only lists two No. 1 singles (Christian radio hits: “Livin’ on the Edge of Dyin’ ” (# 25 in 1979); “You Gave Me All” (# 19 in 1981); “Nobody Loves Me Like You” [with Amy Grant] (# 6 in 1981); "Let the Whole World Sing" (# 1 in 1984); "Ready or Not" (# 31 in 1984); "That's the Way God Planned It" (# 37 in 1984); "All the Losers Win" (# 28 in 1984); "Alleluia! Christ Is Coming" (# 4 in 1985); "Perfect Reflection" (# 25 in 1985); "Destined to Win" (# 2 in 1986); "Casual Christian" (# 9 in 1986); "Apathy Alert" (# 15 in 1986); "Every Moment" (# 1 for 6 weeks in 1986); "Inside Out" (# 12 in 1987); "When the Son Begins to Reign" (# 2 in 1988); "Stand" (# 6 in 1988); "If God Is for Us" (# 5 in 1989); "Hand in Hand" (# 7 in 1989); "I’m Ac- cepted" (# 3 in 1990)"; "Who Will" (# 23 in 1990); "Against the Night" (# 6 in 1991); "Family Reunion" (# 8 in 1991); "I’ll Come Out Fighting for You" (# 9 in 1993); "Talk to Me" (# 5 in 1993); "Soldiers of the Cross" (# 6 in 1993); "Never Look Back" (# 9 in 1994).) Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:49, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mr. Görlitz! Actually I am on the side of if a music artist is notable enough to merit an article then all of their albums merit an article. I get the other side of the this issue. Since it's my desire to work with folks instead of against, I don't push my viewpoint. I appreciate your angle as I had not thought of that as applied to this article specifically. Makes sense to me. I may have access to the the Billboard book. If not I may buy a copy as I found one for less than $2. It may be a good source in the future. Thanks again.THX1136 (talk) 15:02, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You would be going against WP:GNG, WP:NALBUM (and WP:NOTINHERITED and community consensus) if you were to decide that all albums of a notable artist are notable, but it doesn't look like you're suggesting moving forward on creating articles for every release. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:10, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You are correct, sir. I understand policy on that and, while I disagree personally, I will not go forward with something that is in direct opposition to policy.THX1136 (talk) 02:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Dove Awards claim removal
After doing a search of the GMAs database and one with an aggregator for the Dove Awards, I found no mention of the group DeGarmo and Key having received any awards from the organization. I did notice that ForeFront Records was attached to several awards. I suspect that may be where the "17 Dove Awards" claim originated. Unless a good source for that claim can be found it should not be reintroduced into the article as it is about the group itself, not a business with which they were related. Thoughts?THX1136 (talk) 01:03, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * The book listed above does list Dove Awards when subjects won them, but none of D&K. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I think I found a list site that has complete info on nominees and winners. I went through it quickly from 78 through 2006 and only found 5 nominations for D&K. I want to go through it more carefully to verify or correct that number. Like to find another source to compare against if possible. Thanks for your thoughts Walter.THX1136 (talk) 01:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

edit conflict
After spending a good deal of time making sure the cites were good I was notified there was a edit conflict. I'm guessing you made some needed changes before I got my work done. No worries. I'm pretty much discouraged at this point after spending the time. I will leave it to you or another editor to make the necessary changes if any. Thanks!THX1136 (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * No. I was out at the time. {diff|DeGarmo and Key|949157210|949138901|The conflicting edit was made by AnomieBOT "Rescuing orphaned refs ("MAP" from rev 949128103"}}, which is partially my fault, because I renamed that reference earlier. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:59, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I did suggest to you, on your talk page, that you make the edits in a sandbox or other location to avoid problems. I think I have resolved the issue for now. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I made the assumption based on your posted suggestion appearing so soon after I started the process of doing the cites. I, at this time, cannot take the time needed to get things done on the article due to family issues. That leaves it in a poorer state unfortunately. Yesterday was an open window which is now gone. Hopefully I will be able to resume in a month or so. I only attempt to improve articles that I see with issues. I have no skin in the game. If I can make a valuable contribution, good. If I make a change which is reverted if it does not improve an article, good. I bear no ill will to any other editors here. We are all working toward the same goal which I see as presenting solid articles which offer verified information sought by any visitor to the encyclopedia. I appreciate any guidance you have offered. Hope all is well with you.THX1136 (talk) 19:02, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the effort you've put into improving the article. It already looks much better. Please, take care your family. We all recognize that all other editors are doing so on a volunteer basis and I for one appreciate anything that can be done to improve an article. We'll see you when you get back and I trust that it will not be long. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:03, 6 April 2020 (UTC)